# Best Audio Interfaces February 2018



## Kent (Feb 11, 2018)

We seem to skirt around this issue, or mention it in passing, so here it is in its own thread:

In February 2018, what's the best audio interface for mostly-VI work...

...at ~$500?

...at ~$1200?

...at ~$2500?

...at more than $2500, if applicable?

Assume stability and low-latency are a must, and - if possible - at least a few I/O options (i.e. more than just a guitar in and more than just L/R monitor out).


----------



## wst3 (Feb 13, 2018)

You need to define the interface you want to use, and at this point I think USB3 and Thunderbolt are the primary contenders.

RME makes great gear and provides really solid drivers. They have devices at several price points. They also cover more computer interfaces than anyone else - PCI, PCIe, USB, Firewire, MADI, Lightpipe, AES, S/P-DIF, and now Thunderbolt. That's quite the line up. 

I like Universal Audio, and they too have solid drivers and devices at several price points. They only have one USB device, the rest are Thunderbolt2.

Metric Halo also deserve a place on the list, they are limited to Firewire, and I'm not sure I'd invest in a new PC with Firewire, but if you existing system supports it this is a great option.

All of these start at the higher end of the price scale. About the only manufacturer I would trust at the $500 price point is Presonus. They got off to a bumpy start with their drivers, but in the last couple years they have provided solid drivers, and they have maintained them. I have the Audiobox 1818VSL, I don't use it as much since I picked up an Apollo Twin USB, but it is a very good interface, and I won't be parting with anytime soon.


----------



## FriFlo (Feb 13, 2018)

I belong to the rare species of people still using a modular system, meaning PCIe soundcard (RME Madi FX), seperate Converter (2x RME Adi 8QS M) and several preamps. This means of course even bigger investments than some of the most expensive all in one boxes, but it has the advantage of being very flexible and being able to keep on working in, if one piece of equipment should fail. I also don't like the idea of having to dump a whole box, just because one part of it is broken beyond repair. PCIe is also still the connection with lowest latency, although RME USB drivers seem to be very close to that these days. In case I need more preamp channels for bigger recordings, I'd like to add a RME micstacy some day ... 
This is all for a recording studio! If you mostly do midi, cheaper all in one boxes might be fine, I guess!


----------



## WindcryMusic (Feb 13, 2018)

The OP didn't specify what type of DAW he has. If it's an Apple, then I'd say that Apogee should be included on the short list of interfaces worthy of consideration.


----------



## synthpunk (Feb 13, 2018)

How many ways can we rephrase the same question in a month...

I'm done with this one, hope others are to.


----------



## chillbot (Feb 13, 2018)

FriFlo said:


> PCIe is also still the connection with lowest latency



No one ever talks about MOTU interfaces here. Are they still commonly used? It made me think, I've been using three MOTU 2408mk3s for seemingly forever, since whenever the mk3 first came out, all via PCI-e. They run just flawless at 128 samples per buffer, Sonar reports 5.2ms roundtrip latency. It's the part of my setup I think about the least.



synthpunk said:


> I'm done with this one, hope others are to.


I'm not. OP forgot to ask what the best interface is for $59.


----------



## will_m (Feb 13, 2018)

chillbot said:


> No one ever talks about MOTU interfaces here. Are they still commonly used? It made me think, I've been using three MOTU 2408mk3s for seemingly forever, since whenever the mk3 first came out, all via PCI-e. They run just flawless at 128 samples per buffer, Sonar reports 5.2ms roundtrip latency. It's the part of my setup I think about the least.



I'm looking at getting a MOTU 828es but there never seems to be much information on a lot of the MOTU interfaces from users. Maybe they are all quietly content with them. The 828es looks great on paper and about half the price of an RME with a similar feature set.

RME do seem to be king of drivers though, I never seem to find any negative reviews of them.


----------



## X-Bassist (Feb 13, 2018)

chillbot said:


> No one ever talks about MOTU interfaces here. Are they still commonly used? It made me think, I've been using three MOTU 2408mk3s for seemingly forever, since whenever the mk3 first came out, all via PCI-e. They run just flawless at 128 samples per buffer, Sonar reports 5.2ms roundtrip latency. It's the part of my setup I think about the least.
> 
> 
> I'm not. OP forgot to ask what the best interface is for $59.



MOTU 2408 mk3 first went on sale in 2003...
https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/motu-2408-mk3-24io-hd192
I can't believe you're getting that kind of speed out of something 14 years old. I'd like to get a faster interface (my Scarlett 6i6 has not been great) but stick to USB (2 or 3). The modern MOTU interfaces are about the same price as the RME's, yet I wonder if they are as fast. They have some cheaper interfaces (under $500) but it's not worth it to me unless I can get my latency/ buffer down. I'm considering a babyface pro or better if it means I could work regularly with a 128 buffer.

$59? Spill the beans.


----------



## synthpunk (Feb 13, 2018)

Last post in response to my right and honorable bot. MOTU makes good gear. I had a 896HD forever before TB arrived on the scene. I do not think they have a huge following in Europe for some reason. There also have been a few questions about the company's recent longevity.



X-Bassist said:


> MOTU 2408 mk3 first went on sale in 2003...
> https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/motu-2408-mk3-24io-hd192
> I can't believe you're getting that kind of speed out of something 14 years old. I'd like to get a faster interface (my Scarlett 6i6 has not been great) but stick to USB (2 or 3). The modern MOTU interfaces are about the same price as the RME's, yet I wonder if they are as fast. They have some cheaper interfaces (under $500) but it's not worth it to me unless I can get my latency/ buffer down. I'm considering a babyface pro or better if it means I could work regularly with a 128 buffer.
> 
> $59? Spill the beans.


----------



## bvaughn0402 (Feb 13, 2018)

I recently upgraded from an older MOTU (which I did like) ... to a UAD Apollo 8p Thunderbolt, which I LOVE (I'm Mac).

I avoided UAD like the plague, just because of the whole hardware/software thing. But I'm loving it.


----------



## X-Bassist (Feb 13, 2018)

chillbot said:


> No one ever talks about MOTU interfaces here. Are they still commonly used? It made me think, I've been using three MOTU 2408mk3s for seemingly forever, since whenever the mk3 first came out, all via PCI-e. They run just flawless at 128 samples per buffer, Sonar reports 5.2ms roundtrip latency. It's the part of my setup I think about the least.
> 
> 
> I'm not. OP forgot to ask what the best interface is for $59.



Actually like the look of this newer MOTU half rack interface. Same price as RME Babyface with 16x16 (8 analog, 8 adat i/o) .They also come with digital (all AES or all ADAT) or 8x8 line input versions. a little over $700 in cart at JRR Shop (Code: forum). Considering it has thunderbolt and USB3 interfaces promising under 1.6ms latency on either, I feel I have to try it out at some point!
https://www.jrrshop.com/motu-624


----------



## chillbot (Feb 13, 2018)

X-Bassist said:


> I can't believe you're getting that kind of speed out of something 14 years old.


Yeah, that's why this is eye-opening to me. What am I missing out on. But MOTU has been so solid for so long for me. I don't record through it, I have two Avalon VT-737-SP preamps that I record through. All the MOTUs are doing is connecting about 48 channels of ADAT digitally to my mixers but the PCI-e seems to be the thing that I'm wondering what is better now. And what interface now will give me 72 channels of I/O at that latency...? I almost feel like it's when they took away serial ports and all of a sudden all the MIDI became a victim of USB...


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Feb 13, 2018)

chillbot said:


> but the PCI-e seems to be the thing that I'm wondering what is better now.


Probably nothing? Maybe Thunderbolt.



chillbot said:


> And what interface now will give me 72 channels of I/O at that latency...?



Aside from a couple of interfaces with 4 adat ports (so only 32) or ones where you can use multiple interfaces (like Avid interfaces or Focusrite Rednet) you're basically stuck with madi for that many channels. It's too bad that the adat<->madi devices cost as much as an entire interface.


----------



## chillbot (Feb 13, 2018)

Gerhard Westphalen said:


> Aside from a couple of interfaces with 4 adat ports (so only 32) or ones where you can use multiple interfaces (like Avid interfaces or Focusrite Rednet) you're basically stuck with madi for that many channels. It's too bad that the adat<->madi devices cost as much as an entire interface.


I should have prefaced this... I just got a brand new spanking computer this year (well, last year, within the last year) and I'm not switching from my MOTUs unless they die or the computer dies, whichever comes first. I hope that's a long time. But I'm wondering, using only digital-to-digital in the MOTUs, am I losing quality using interfaces that old? Does it matter? Do I care with the latency I'm getting?


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Feb 13, 2018)

Has anyone tried the Merging Technologies ones? Seems to have high quality converters. I haven't really looked into how it interfaces with the computer since it only has ethernet. No clue if it works with DAWs other than Pyramix.

Anyone try the new Avid ones (MTRX)? They're marketing them as the best of the best (and the price reflects that) but I doubt they really sound that good coming from AVoID. I feel like the power supply in something like that should have some beast of a transformer.

The features and I/O flexibility seems killer but at the end of the day, you're limited to 64x64 which seems ridiculous for an interface of that class. Should be more like 64 from the cards + 64 madi + 64 Dante + the AES.

I doubt they'll catch on. Pro studio that are happy with the normal HD won't care enough about quality to purchase these and others using higher end converters will stick to those. Will probably only be sold in the post production market where they can burn through money and need things like madi (although if you're using Madi, you should just get the HD Madi since on this you then wouldn't be able to use any other I/O).

$8697 for an 8x8 interface? RME and Antelope with more I/O are less than half the price. OK, converters probably aren't as good but at that price point they're competing with Prism and Lavry which I think would blow the Avid out of the water.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Feb 13, 2018)

chillbot said:


> am I losing quality using interfaces that old? Does it matter? Do I care with the latency I'm getting?


Short answer is no.


----------



## X-Bassist (Feb 13, 2018)

chillbot said:


> Yeah, that's why this is eye-opening to me. What am I missing out on. But MOTU has been so solid for so long for me. I don't record through it, I have two Avalon VT-737-SP preamps that I record through. All the MOTUs are doing is connecting about 48 channels of ADAT digitally to my mixers but the PCI-e seems to be the thing that I'm wondering what is better now. And what interface now will give me 72 channels of I/O at that latency...? I almost feel like it's when they took away serial ports and all of a sudden all the MIDI became a victim of USB...



Actually the MOTU devices claim to give you up to 128 inputs and 128 outputs. You can string multiple units together using ethernet. Pretty clever. Using the adat version (32 i/o each @$749) or go madi, but it seems possible through Thuderbolt or USB 3. It’s just paying for the interfaces. You sure you can’t mix some of that internally?


----------



## X-Bassist (Feb 13, 2018)

chillbot said:


> I should have prefaced this... I just got a brand new spanking computer this year (well, last year, within the last year) and I'm not switching from my MOTUs unless they die or the computer dies, whichever comes first. I hope that's a long time. But I'm wondering, using only digital-to-digital in the MOTUs, am I losing quality using interfaces that old? Does it matter? Do I care with the latency I'm getting?



Stick with what you have if it works. There really is no difference if it supports the size/type of session your doing (48/96), especially using the digital outs. Seems like a great set up. I just would like something that I can use with a decent sized templete without going to a 512 buffer. At 128 (or less?) I would be a happy camper.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Feb 13, 2018)

FriFlo said:


> PCIe is also still the connection with lowest latency, although RME USB drivers seem to be very close to that these days.



I’d say the new Apogee stuff is as fast or faster. The Element has a 1.41ms round-trip at 96kHz with a 32 buffer setting. Mine doesn’t flinch.


----------



## Kent (Feb 20, 2018)

Okay, maybe I'm just ignorant... but I seem to have read somewhere that USB (especially to-capacity, like with a full modern virtual orchestra) causes higher CPU usage than, say, TB? In that case, wouldn't it be better to go with the wider bandwidth option? (Or how does RME do it?)

As a corollary to that, what are you considering "low-latency"? My current interface reports 22.4 ms RT/14.3 ms Output in Logic @256, and I'm not entirely convinced those numbers should be called "low-latency." ...


----------



## babylonwaves (Feb 21, 2018)

motu all the way. their new ethernet based interfaces are great, especially when you're recording a lot in different situations. i get an output latency of [email protected] on my 828.
somebody else in this thread said apogee if you're on mac. i think they're the total nightmare by now. maybe the hardware is good. the software certainly isn't.


----------



## Kent (Feb 21, 2018)

babylonwaves said:


> somebody else in this thread said apogee if you're on mac. i think they're the total nightmare by now. maybe the hardware is good. the software certainly isn't.


Why/how is that?


----------



## charlieclouser (Feb 21, 2018)

kmaster said:


> Why/how is that?



There was a series of Apogee interfaces that stopped working when we got to a certain OS / hardware configuration on Mac, and it took a long time for the issue to be corrected - and owners were not happy. I can't remember which interface it was, but it wasn't the very latest stuff. In general, Apogee stuff sounds amazingly good on the analog side, but is a bit expensive and has somewhat limited digital connectivity and expansion compared to some others.

If I was not doing anything in surround, I'd look hard at the UA stuff. The analog side sounds fantastic - some say the best ever - and having the UAD dsp engine and Unison technology is a big plus. But, like the Apogee stuff, they offer limited digital connectivity, so they're not ideal for people like me who need to output 48 channels across MADI while bringing in 16 channels of AES or whatever. Their Apollo series is fantastic for anyone who's "just" making records in stereo.

Focusrite are really sucking a lot of air out of the interface space these days, with seemingly endless varieties of Clarett and Scarlet boxes alongside even lower and higher end stuff. Problem is, besides sucking a lot of air out of the room, their earlier USB interfaces were doing a to of just plain sucking for a while there. Lots of forum posts about noise blasts and bad USB performance. However, they recently seriously upped their game with the Red series and updated Clarett range, both of which offer Thunderbolt connectivity. Clarett tops out at 28 channels of mixed i/o, while the Red range gets into high-end territory with DigiLink and very sophisticated Dante networking. The possibilities are vast, and the Focusrite Dante range seems to be the only line besides MOTU AVB that passes 128 channels to the host, so if you need super-high channel counts this is worth a look. The Dante / Red range is not cheap, but they do have a PCIe Dante host card that eliminates the need for a Thunderbolt port if you're on Windows or have a Mac Thunderbolt>PCI expansion chassis, and in a single slot you're talking to 128 channels of i/o across multiple interfaces distributed throughout a large building and all connected via Ethernet, with elaborate channel mirroring and mixing. Super-flexible. For a big facility I'd give them a serious look. A good buddy went with the Red / Dante setup and he's loving it. Main studio in one building talks to a tracking room and assistant's rig across the driveway via a single 100-foot Ethernet wire, and both studios can access the tracking room simultaneously by just fiddling with some software. Very cool.

RME are rightly respected for their rock-solid drivers and excellent support on Windows as well as Mac, and they do have some interesting digital format support, like cheap USB3 - MADI interfaces etc. Their analog side is, like the MOTU AVB stuff, nothing to sneeze at but does not have "character" like the UAD Apollo stuff might. What DSP they do have on-board is, like the MOTU AVB stuff, useful for applying some compression, eq, and basic reverb to headphone feeds or whatever, but I wouldn't usually track through that stuff except for the most basic use like applying a high-pass filter or something - it's not like modeled classic compressors or anything, just simple workhorse dsp. The variety of hardware and i/o formats is good but not great, and there is no real ability to network interfaces as you can with MOTU AVB or Dante based stuff. BUT. RME do offer a line of PCIe cards that give stupidly high channel counts if you are into complex setups with external boxes, and those interfaces have been around forever and they just work. The latest and greatest from them, the Fireface UFX+, gives Thunderbolt and USB3 connectivity and has MADI as well as ADAT and analog. It's a favorite of some of my friends. Their TotalMix software looks great and works reliably all day with no fuss, and is extremely flexible - it's tied for "best ever" with MOTU's older CueMix software, which was the original and best "outside the DAW" mixing software. (MOTU's current AVB mixer software is great but slightly more confusing and less flexible than the older CueMix). If I could find a configuration of RME hardware that had the combination of i/o I wanted I would not hesitate to purchase. Rock solid, good sound, good price.

For anyone who needs the utmost options in terms of connectivity, MOTU's latest AVB series simply cannot be beat. The variety of interfaces let you configure any crazy combination of analog and digital i/o, some models will work via USB3, and when you connect the first interface to the host via Thunderbolt and subsequent interfaces to the primary via Ethernet / AVB, you are looking at a ridiculous array of options for where you place your interfaces and what format of i/o you're using. It's a simple matter to place an interface with analog and headphone i/o near your working position, with another that has 64 channels of MADI, 24 channels of AES, and 24 channels of ADAT in your machine rack, another with 16 analog line i/o in your synth rack, and yet another with mic preamps located across the building in your recording space. All non-primary interfaces connect via Ethernet and the cabling can be 100 meters long. The best part is that the MOTU AVB system, like the Focusrite Red / Dante rig, passes 128 channels to the host when connected via Thunderbolt, and in an AVB setup you can pick and choose whatever 128 channels you want, down to a single channel at a time, out of the total i/o provided in hardware, and that wacky combination of channels is what gets presented to the host - and channel names established in the setup software are passed upstream to the host DAW. There are some limitations, like the fact that AVB streams are passed between interfaces in 8-channel bricks, but each 8-channel brick can be comprised of whatever combination of single i/o channels an interface provides. It can get nuts, but it's so freaking flexible. The interfaces are cheap for what they are, offer extremely low latency, and all analog i/o is done with the latest and greatest Sabre chips. The analog side sound is crisp and clear, but not "characterful" - no complaints. Their CueMix software offers on-board compressors, eq, and reverb, and very flexible routing for headphone mixes etc. Windows support is slightly more tricky than on Mac, but I think everything's working now. On Mac, I've been using their 112d and 1248 interfaces for three years or so, and have not had one click, pop, loss of sync, or digital noise blast in all that time. Like their older PCI interfaces (2408 mk3) which I used for more than a decade, they just work - and they don't mess with you.

And then there's Antelope. Ugh. Where to start? Their Goliath HD offers the most tantalizing combination of i/o and connectivity in history, including a totally unique "ass-to-ass" mode where two host computers can connect to a single interface at the same time. (!!!) This lets you do stuff like connect your main DAW and a ProTools stem recorder to the same interface, and pass 64 channels between the computers inside the box while both computers can access all of the analog and digital i/o, or connect a laptop running Ableton to the interface at the same time as your main DAW is connected, to bring in audio from a guest producer seamlessly. It's absolutely nuts, amazing, and totally the way of the future. Problem is - they don't work. Or, rather, they seem to be working, and then they stop. And then you have to re-flash the firmware. And then they work. And then they stop working, and you re-flash the firmware but you brick the unit and it has to go in for service. A buddy spent three months battling this rig and he wound up never getting it to work reliably, and wound up with a boring Lynx interface which sounds great but is plain-jane and not thrilling at all in terms of features. The heartbreaking part about the Antelope saga is that the Goliath HD had hands-down the best-sounding analog side in the history of digital audio, as far as we were concerned. Like, not a subtle difference. Compared to MOTU, Avid, Lynx, RME - Antelope was easily noticeable to be far and away the best analog sound. Seriously great. Wide, deep, crisp, and clear, with shockingly low noise floor and extreme dynamic range. But the software and firmware side let us down, the battle was lost, and the units went back. He went through four Goliath HD units in total. Sad, because like I said, their A>D and D>A was the best we'd ever heard, and these units offered direct DigiLink connectivity, Thunderbolt, USB3, MADI, mic preamps, analog inserts, re-amp outputs, and on and on. Oh well.

TL;DR = for small setups or stereo-only rigs I'd go UAD. For medium size setups I'd go RME. For big rigs it's MOTU AVB. For building-wide installs I like Focusrite Red / Dante.


----------



## babylonwaves (Feb 21, 2018)

kmaster said:


> Why/how is that?


the process of getting the interfaces to work when you e.g. use a thunderbridge or daisy chain from protools HD is not straight forward at all. you need to try around a lot to get a connection. maestro2 (their mixer software) like to crash. support for older hardware/macOS version seems mostly limited whereas competitors like motu or RME don't have an issue with that.
ha, i should have hit refresh and read charlies input first


----------



## antoniopandrade (Feb 21, 2018)

charlieclouser said:


> There was a series of Apogee interfaces that stopped working when we got to a certain OS / hardware configuration on Mac, and it took a long time for the issue to be corrected - and owners were not happy. I can't remember which interface it was, but it wasn't the very latest stuff. In general, Apogee stuff sounds amazingly good on the analog side, but is a bit expensive and has somewhat limited digital connectivity and expansion compared to some others.
> 
> If I was not doing anything in surround, I'd look hard at the UA stuff. The analog side sounds fantastic - some say the best ever - and having the UAD dsp engine and Unison technology is a big plus. But, like the Apogee stuff, they offer limited digital connectivity, so they're not ideal for people like me who need to output 48 channels across MADI while bringing in 16 channels of AES or whatever. Their Apollo series is fantastic for anyone who's "just" making records in stereo.
> 
> ...




Damn, regarding the Goliath HD's double computer connectivity... that's unbelievable, I had no idea it could do that. I was wondering why it cost 2k more than the regular Goliath.... which I own.

I have to say, I love it. I'm not sure how the HD unit sounds, but the regular ol' Goliath sounds unbelievable. I went from an Apollo to it and I couldn't believe how much better it sounded. I'm finding myself recording so much more, simply because it sounds so damn good. I also love that it can be a studio centerpiece throughout multiple levels of expandability. Want to add a MADI card / stem machine? No problem. Extra synths? Sure. Pre-amps, pedalboard? Easy.

And the software for me has been pretty solid so far. I've heard horrible things regarding the Goliath's firmware / software (perhaps this problem affects only HD units) but on my rig it's been rock solid for about 2 months now.


----------



## charlieclouser (Feb 21, 2018)

antoniopandrade said:


> Damn, regarding the Goliath HD's double computer connectivity... that's unbelievable, I had no idea it could do that. I was wondering why it cost 2k more than the regular Goliath.... which I own.
> 
> I have to say, I love it. I'm not sure how the HD unit sounds, but the regular ol' Goliath sounds unbelievable. I went from an Apollo to it and I couldn't believe how much better it sounded. I'm finding myself recording so much more, simply because it sounds so damn good. I also love that it can be a studio centerpiece throughout multiple levels of expandability. Want to add a MADI card / stem machine? No problem. Extra synths? Sure. Pre-amps, pedalboard? Easy.
> 
> And the software for me has been pretty solid so far. I've heard horrible things regarding the Goliath's firmware / software (perhaps this problem affects only HD units) but on my rig it's been rock solid for about 2 months now.



Yeah, it was pretty much the dual-host aspect that seemed to be bringing the Goliath HD rig down. Even when not used in that mode, the fact that the code for that was lurking in the firmware seemed to be at the root of the problems. We tried everything, and I mean *everything*, to get it working - connect to host A via USB3 or Thunderbolt, four different USB3 cables of various lengths with and without Ferrite beads, with and without various hubs, Apple or Corning glass fiber Thunderbolt cables of various lengths, blah blah blah. It was a tragic experience full of hopes and dreams being crushed! The dual-host thing was what would have made me switch, and although the limit of 64 channels to the host was a bit of a problem for me I'd have lived with that in return for ass-to-ass mode. A PT rig and a Logic rig both accessing all of the analog and digital i/o simultaneously? Amazing. And the sound? So good. As you've found, it's really really outstanding. We did elaborate shootouts and the difference between the Goliath HD and the others was instantly obvious. 

I know that a lot of users (like you) who are using other Antelope interfaces are loving life and wallowing in great analog-side performance, and aren't experience work-stopping issues like we had with the Goliath HD. I wish our experience had been so smooth.

I'll even be so masochistic as to give it another shot if I hear of some major update, firmware change, or some other development in the series because the sound and feature set of the Goliath HD is unbeatable. But I can't deal with a minute of downtime, so for the moment I'm staying with the boring, but flexible, MOTU AVB rig.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Feb 21, 2018)

kmaster said:


> As a corollary to that, what are you considering "low-latency"? My current interface reports 22.4 ms RT/14.3 ms Output in Logic @256, and I'm not entirely convinced those numbers should be called "low-latency." ...



I can actually achieve zero latency at a 32 buffer setting with my Apogee Element, I love it. If you are using Logic, the software integrates right into it, and the interface shows up directly in the channel strips. If you prefer hardware based controls, it's not a good choice in that regard, but I love how I can control everything on the Mac (routing, pre-amp settings, headphone levels, etc).


----------



## Kent (Feb 21, 2018)

charlieclouser said:


> There was a series of Apogee interfaces that stopped working when we got to a certain OS / hardware configuration on Mac, and it took a long time for the issue to be corrected - and owners were not happy. I can't remember which interface it was, but it wasn't the very latest stuff. In general, Apogee stuff sounds amazingly good on the analog side, but is a bit expensive and has somewhat limited digital connectivity and expansion compared to some others.
> 
> If I was not doing anything in surround, I'd look hard at the UA stuff. The analog side sounds fantastic - some say the best ever - and having the UAD dsp engine and Unison technology is a big plus. But, like the Apogee stuff, they offer limited digital connectivity, so they're not ideal for people like me who need to output 48 channels across MADI while bringing in 16 channels of AES or whatever. Their Apollo series is fantastic for anyone who's "just" making records in stereo.
> 
> ...


Happy birthday to me! What a fantastic and detailed answer. Thanks, @charlieclouser!


----------



## chillbot (Feb 21, 2018)

Any opinion on a 4-year-old Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 vs the newer Mackie Big Knob 4x3, both USB, for the ASSistant studio?

I bought the Big Knob not realizing it's also an audio interface. Waiting on some cables from Sweetwater to arrive to finish wiring, so right now everything is going through the Big Knob and I'm wondering what the heck do I need the Focusrite for.

Keeping them both is an option, just wondering which you would use. Think the price range is roughly the same, the Focusrite was a couple hundred more but is also four years older. Obviously I'm not looking at anything high-end.


----------



## sdBDigital (Feb 22, 2018)

Idunno. I've utilized Focusrite with great results. I've utilized Universal Audio with great results. I'm really curious about the UA Arrow, but I worry about that single core DSP. I wouldn't apply the UA plugins with that thing on the road, but it might be good for tracking.


----------



## synthpunk (Feb 22, 2018)

It is scratch your head product for me despite its appeal for the mobility buss powered and entry level crowds. Ultimately they want you to buy a Satellite I guess.



sdBDigital said:


> I'm really curious about the UA Arrow, but I worry about that single core DSP. I wouldn't apply the UA plugins with that thing on the road, but it might be good for tracking.


----------



## charlieclouser (Feb 22, 2018)

I think the UA Arrow is aimed at mobile / portable tracking through their Unison emulations, not full-on mixing with tons of UAD plugins. An old friend of mine who's primarily a songwriting producer travels the globe with nothing but a Macbook, two mics, and a single vintage Neve 1073 channel. He just tried out the Unison stuff on a writing / vocal tracking session and told me his next purchase will be a small UA interface with Unison and possibly the Townsend mic. So for that type of person the Arrow is kind of ideal.


----------



## Kent (Feb 22, 2018)

What are your opinions on the Presonus Quantum series? They seem almost too good to be true.


----------



## charlieclouser (Feb 23, 2018)

I haven't seen a Quantum in person yet, except for at the NAMM show, and I don't know anyone who has one. On paper at least, here's the pros and cons as I see it:

PROS:

- Two Thunderbolt ports for daisy-chaining multiple Quantum interfaces. UA Apollo also does this, but many (most) Thunderbolt interfaces, like the MOTU and RME boxes, only have a single Thunderbolt port. In terms of expandability, this feature is nice on the Quantum and Apollo boxes, but can't hold a candle to the extreme networking capabilities of the MOTU AVB line. RME stuff does not expand via Thunderbolt or network - what you got is what you get, except for adding AD<>DA via ADAT or MADI ports or whatever. The dual Thunderbolt ports on the Quantum will make it easier to integrate external hard drives, UAD Satellite boxes, or extra displays on a laptop rig - MOTU and RME boxes only have a single Thunderbolt port, so they have to be at the end of a Thunderbolt chain and don't pass through to other devices. This is only an issue if you're on an older Macbook (or low-end recent non-pro MacBooks) with only one or two Thunderbolt ports - all current desktop Macs and recent Macbook Pro's have either four or six Thunderbolt or USB-C ports. Remember that Thunderbolt can *NOT* be "split" with a hub like USB can. All of those "Thunderbolt Docks" that you see can "peel off" *other* formats (like USB, FireWire, Ethernet, DisplayPort, and audio) but the Thunderbolt connection / stream itself can not *ever* be split or multiplied, and this will not change any time soon. So dead-end devices like the MOTU and RME boxes might present some limitations on computers with limited Thunderbolt ports.

- Quantum has a single 5-pin MIDI in and out per box. This is handy, but probably not a game changer for most users. Many RME boxes have this; most MOTU and others do not.

CONS:

- Quantum does not appear to have any form of DSP on board, and nothing that resembles MOTU's CueMix or RME's TotalMix software. Both of those allow you to create a headphone mix and monitor what you're recording without going through your DAW. This is an often overlooked feature and is super useful, as it allows you to run your DAW at a high buffer setting to ease the stress on your CPU, while being able to hear your live input at near-zero latency at all time. Personally, I have relied upon this type of feature since my first native rig and I would not buy a native system that didn't have it. Previously I'd always worked on ProTools TDM rigs, which, like the newer HDX systems, are not subject to host buffer size limitations in any way. ProTools Native and all other native-based hardware are always subject to those limitations, and a CueMix / TotalMix software solution that provides "in front of the DAW" mixing inside the DSP of the interface is the only way around the problem, and it works great. Apollo has a similar function, not sure about the smaller UA interfaces. Quantum's lack of DSP also means that there won't be any quick-n-dirty eq, compressor, or reverb available to be applied to headphone mixes (other than what's in your DAW) - but that doesn't matter so much since Quantum doesn't have the ability to set up on-board mixes anyway. Still, that lack of Cue Mix and DSP would be a serious issue for me and would prevent me from buying Quantum. Presonus's own website describes the Quantum as being "free of on-board DSP for a straight-to-the-DAW recording experience" as though that were somehow an advantage. It's not. Their claims of "ultra low latency" are snake oil - that box won't be any better or worse than any other Thunderbolt interface, and operating at "low latency" will require you to use a small buffer setting on your host DAW - which means fewer tracks and fewer plugins on any given CPU than you'd get with a higher buffer setting. Since there's no CueMix / TotalMix, you'll always be hearing what you're recording through the host buffer. So unless you're on a beastly computer, you'll always be juggling buffer size versus number of plugins - and no matter what computer you're on, sooner or later you'll have a project with so many plugins and Kontakt instances that you need to raise the buffer size to avoid CPU overload and clicks and pops - and then you won't be able to monitor any new audio you want to record without freezing tracks, bouncing VI tracks, etc. If you're using an analog console on the front end of the Quantum that would allow you to monitor your live sources that way, this might not be an issue, but who does that anymore? Some EDM types who still use a small analog board might be okay with this, but most of the rest of us have moved on to software-only mixing AND monitor mixing. In short, trying to monitor your guitar or vocals *through* the DAW instead of through a CueMix type software will result in frustration sooner or later. CueMix eliminates this problem, and Quantum doesn't have it.

- The power inlet is via an AC Adaptor and not a standard IEC power cable. Come on guys. That's bush league stuff. Probably works okay - until you lose or break the adaptor.

- The i/o selection is as plain-jane as it gets. Eight ins, eight outs, a pair of monitor outs, a pair of S/PDIF, sixteen channels of ADAT, two headphone. Boring. Literally every manufacturer has an interface with this configuration. Might be fine for many users, but why aren't they buying the excellent RME Fireface UFX+ or the MOTU 1248 (both of which have CueMix / TotalMix)? Or any of a dozen other nearly identical boxes?

At $999, the Quantum is a notch cheaper than MOTU's 1248 at $1,499, which has more or less the same set of i/o - but the MOTU has huge expandability via AVB, USB for compatibility with a wider variety of situations, and of course a very full-featured CueMix setup with compressors and eq on every channel as well as handy (although basic) reverb to add a little splash in the vocalist's headphones that won't be (but can be) printed to the DAW. It's just.... a way better box. (And it has a real power inlet, not an AC Adaptor)

The RME Fireface UFX+ is a big notch more expensive at $2,499 and that extra grand over the MOTU's price gets you MADI and a pair of MIDI jacks but not a whole lot else over the 1248. For some folks with a separate MADI-equipped ProTools print rig, the UFX+ might be all they need on their native DAW, so it's not a total loser, but I went with MOTU for max flexibility... and it kicks much ass.

TL;DR = The Quantum's feature set is plain-jane, Presonus's claims of the "speed" of the Quantum are mostly snake oil, and under no circumstances would I use a native interface that didn't have a CueMix / TotalMix type of front-end software - unless I *never* wanted to record live audio sources.


----------



## Kent (Feb 23, 2018)

I agree with you about the lame power cable/jack, but it seems to me (though you or others may see something in these numbers I do not) that the latency report is not entirely snake oil: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/mus...erface-low-latency-performance-data-base.html


----------



## khollister (Feb 23, 2018)

I was recently all set to get a Quantum 2 but decided to stick with my UCX. I'm still stuck on wanting a TB interface, hoping for a small audio quality uptick on the DAC but need multiple HW outs and, ideally, some internal routing/EQ to manage my subwoofer (there goes the Apogee Element 24). After this thread (and Charlie's comments in particular) I'm now thinking the MOTU 828es may be the solution. CueMix, wifi control via iPad, ESS Saber DAC's, stable TB drivers on Mac, reasonable price (compared to Apollo) & no power brick. Only downside is single ended TB. I already have a TB2 chain for my UAD Satellite Octo, but it would have to be powered on all the time with the MOTU at the end of the chain.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Feb 23, 2018)

Motu 1248 here..masses of configuration options, a nice software mixer and great sound......
http://motu.com/products/avb/1248


----------



## synthpunk (Feb 23, 2018)

Perfect use for that, a single UAD dsp can handle 2 mono or 1 stereo 1073 Unison. I will still keep my Lunchbox though. 

2 Townsend's are in my future. Along with the new UAD Ocean Way mic collection, just a dream come true there!



charlieclouser said:


> I think the UA Arrow is aimed at mobile / portable tracking through their Unison emulations, not full-on mixing with tons of UAD plugins. An old friend of mine who's primarily a songwriting producer travels the globe with nothing but a Macbook, two mics, and a single vintage Neve 1073 channel. He just tried out the Unison stuff on a writing / vocal tracking session and told me his next purchase will be a small UA interface with Unison and possibly the Townsend mic. So for that type of person the Arrow is kind of ideal.


----------



## charlieclouser (Feb 23, 2018)

kmaster said:


> I agree with you about the lame power cable/jack, but it seems to me (though you or others may see something in these numbers I do not) that the latency report is not entirely snake oil: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/mus...erface-low-latency-performance-data-base.html



What I mean about Presonus's claims being snake oil is that they claim that the lack of an on-board DSP engine and the inclusion of DMA technology will somehow eliminate the need for a CueMix type situation, providing host-based monitor mixing at latencies of 1ms or so. When you dig a little deeper, little asterisks start to appear, saying things like: "*at 192kHz Sample Rate" etc. If Presonus have somehow cracked some nut that nobody else could crack, we'll know about it soon enough, and I'll be watching the press for reviews and results - but it appears that it's just a plain-jane interface with good (great?) performance and a lackluster feature set. If it's a revolution in digital audio technology then we'll all know soon enough.

I always prefer to run my host DAW at a mid-sized buffer for smooth performance and lots of CPU headroom, and leave the monitor mixing tasks to the interface's on-board DSP and CueMix type software. MOTU claim something like fourteen samples (not fourteen milliseconds, fourteen *samples*) as input-to-CueMix-to-output round-trip latency, and that happens no matter what the host DAW's buffer is set to. That's on par with the old TDM systems we all made records with for a decade, and is just fine by me. Some folks really want to monitor through the DAW, so they can record through some nifty host-based plugins, and that might be crucial if you're recording weird grain-cloud guitars or whatever, but the fact that everyone from UA to RME to MOTU have adopted a CueMix type deal shows that there are too many variables in host computer configurations to claim that an interface can offer this performance reliably.

One tidbit in that Gearslutz thread mentioned the Quantum occasionally losing connection with the Thunderbolt bus and requiring a power cycle a few times, and that the power switch was too sensitive and easy to accidentally bump and power down the unit while adjusting front panel headphone volume settings - and the power switch *is* right next to those headphone volume knobs, so.... FYI both MOTU and RME boxes have big, chunky, mechanical power switches, not soft-touch push-on/push-off switches.

Maybe Quantum can do a bit better than other interfaces - allowing you to use small buffer settings with less CPU load than the competition - but no matter what interface you use, sooner or later there will probably come a point where your session is so big and taxing the computer so hard that you just need to raise the buffer a notch or two to reduce the CPU load - and if you then want to overdub just one more guitar part, you'll be glad you have CueMix or similar. 

So that's what I mean about snake oil - Presonus's claim that their interface is so fast that on-board DSP mixing is not needed anymore puts a little false hope out there. Not every computer, host DAW, or project size will allow for such operation in every possible situation.

It's sort of like Exxon saying that their new gasoline makes your car so fast that you won't need headlights anymore, since you'll now be moving faster than the speed of light. Sooner or later, you'll need to slow down because you're driving with a couch sticking out of the trunk. When that happens, you'll be glad you have headlights (or CueMix).


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Feb 23, 2018)

charlieclouser said:


> There was a series of Apogee interfaces that stopped working when we got to a certain OS / hardware configuration on Mac, and it took a long time for the issue to be corrected - and owners were not happy. I can't remember which interface it was, but it wasn't the very latest stuff. In general, Apogee stuff sounds amazingly good on the analog side, but is a bit expensive and has somewhat limited digital connectivity and expansion compared to some others.
> 
> If I was not doing anything in surround, I'd look hard at the UA stuff. The analog side sounds fantastic - some say the best ever - and having the UAD dsp engine and Unison technology is a big plus. But, like the Apogee stuff, they offer limited digital connectivity, so they're not ideal for people like me who need to output 48 channels across MADI while bringing in 16 channels of AES or whatever. Their Apollo series is fantastic for anyone who's "just" making records in stereo.
> 
> ...


Have you looked into the new Avid interfaces? Avid-related issues aside, it seems like a great interface with the most flexibility around. Pretty much endless I/O. I think it's ridiculous that you're limited to 64 I/O going to an HDX system but you can split it to connect 2 PT systems and use the interface as a patchbay to connect a huge number of rigs together and feeding each other. Seems like a great solution for studios that need complex routing with many rigs. From what I've heard, Alan Meyerson is now using one to coordinate his 3 PT rigs.


----------



## khollister (Feb 23, 2018)

Quick question for anyone familiar with the MOTU - can you create fader groups in the mixer like you can in RME TotalMix? I did find out from a quick glance at the manual that you can run both Monitor A & B at the same time (sats + sub for instance) but I didn't immediately see how to have the volume knob control 2 arbitrary output pairs.


----------



## charlieclouser (Feb 23, 2018)

synthpunk said:


> Perfect use for that, a single UAD dsp can handle 2 mono or 1 stereo 1073 Unison. I will still keep my Lunchbox though.
> 
> 2 Townsend's are in my future. Along with the new UAD Ocean Way mic collection, just a dream come true there!



Yeah, my buddy who's the traveling writer / producer has the simplest setup in history. Even though he's produced and mixed huge records for Elton John, k.d. lang, etc., nowadays he likes to concentrate on writing sessions with female vocalists and wants his setup to be carry-on-sized. This dude has some serious ears and if he likes the Unison and Townsend emulations then that's good enough for me! He also doesn't need more than two channels of input at a time - seriously, all he ever plugs in is a single vocal mic and one guitar. I wish my life was so simple!


----------



## charlieclouser (Feb 23, 2018)

Gerhard Westphalen said:


> Have you looked into the new Avid interfaces? Avid-related issues aside, it seems like a great interface with the most flexibility around. Pretty much endless I/O. I think it's ridiculous that you're limited to 64 I/O going to an HDX system but you can split it to connect 2 PT systems and use the interface as a patchbay to connect a huge number of rigs together and feeding each other. Seems like a great solution for studios that need complex routing with many rigs. From what I've heard, Alan Meyerson is now using one to coordinate his 3 PT rigs.



Those new Avid boxes do look "the business" and coming from their origins at D.A.D. we know the audio quality is impeccable. Thankfully I don't need to integrate three ProTools rigs, because those new Avid boxes are $$$ for what they are. Probably worth it though. But all I need to do is pipe between 48 and 64 channels from the native Logic rig to the ProTools stem recorder, and that stem recorder is fine as a PTHD Native Thunderbolt system with an Avid MADI box and a SyncHD. Feeding it from the Logic side using the MOTU 112d to give me MADI output means that I also have 24 AES and 24 ADAT to play with on the primary interface, so I can easily bring in a bunch of external sources and also feed my surround monitors which have AES inputs. 

The awesome thing is that I'm returning the MADI output of ProTools back into the 112d, and I can set up a pair of routing presets in the MOTU software: Preset #1 routes Logic's outputs 1-64 to the MADI output (which goes to the ProTools machine) and, at the same time, mirrors outputs 1-6 to the AES outputs that go to my speakers. Preset #2 still routes Logic's outputs 1-64 to the MADI output, but feeds the AES output from the MADI return from ProTools, instead of from Logic's outputs. So if I want to monitor through ProTools instead of directly from Logic I just switch from preset #1 to preset #2. It is so great. 

Most of the time my ProTools stem recorder is switched off while I compose in Logic, but when it's time to print mixes I just switch routing presets in the MOTU setup app and then I can hear Logic's output coming back from input-monitoring-enabled tracks in ProTools, alongside previously-recorded cues in the ProTools timeline. So easy, so good.

But that ass-to-ass mode in the Goliath HD was tantalizing - or would be if it worked flawlessly and I didn't already have a setup that was cheaper, passes 128 channels to the host (not 64), and has been working great for years. Since I don't use D>A (my monitors have digital inputs) and all of my A>D is done externally on Cranesong Spider or whatever, the fantastic and game-changing analog-side audio performance of the Goliath HD is not crucial to me. But it would be nice to have I guess. I'll give Goliath HD another look if it gets tweaked or updated for sure.


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 23, 2018)

charlieclouser said:


> .



I appreciate greatly, your detailed impressions and experiences.
Will be updating (2) Home Studio Win10 Pro DAW(s) shortly and your helpful posts led me to speak with MOTU (Dave Roberts) just now.
Very limited needs _here_ will be met nicely by (2) Ultra_Lite_ AVB, at reasonable cost.
Future capability, connecting both DAW(s), is a bit away, but nice to have the potential available.

Many THX!


----------



## charlieclouser (Feb 23, 2018)

sostenuto said:


> I appreciate greatly, your detailed impressions and experiences.
> Will be updating (2) Home Studio Win10 Pro DAW(s) shortly and your helpful posts led me to speak with MOTU (Dave Roberts) just now.
> Very limited needs _here_ will be met nicely by (2) Ultra_Lite_ AVB, at reasonable cost.
> Future capability, connecting both DAW(s), is a bit away, but nice to have the potential available.
> ...



I just hope you'll have no problems with the MOTU stuff on Windows - when the product line first came out there was a lot of hassle and confusion for Windows users, what with various Thunderbolt configurations on the motherboard vs PCI cards, blah blah blah. It may be all sorted out now, but it was tough going there for a while for MOTU AVB users on Windows, and since I'm on Mac I never followed it too closely. MOTU was a Mac-only company for many many years and Windows is only in the last ten years or so for them - so buyer beware! I'm sure the MOTU guy will say, "It's all good!" but scan the forums, like this 113-page thread on Gearslutz:

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/943494-motu-1248-8m-16a-thunderbolt-interface.html

On some other threads over there guys love the Quantum, many of them Windows guys, but some of them are also Presonus Studio One users who are doing mostly audio tracking and less v.i. use. On one thread someone said that configuring their Thunderbolt card and their Asus motherboard under Windows was "quite hard" but once set up it worked perfectly, and the same user said that on Mac the Quantum "worked instantly".

All of my experience and advice applies to Mac only - I haven't messed with a Windows box since I retired my last GigaSampler machine more than fifteen years ago (a mighty Pentium 4 machine running W98!). 

I do like the MOTU boxes for the expandability and reasonable cost, but other manufacturers may have more of a long history with the Windows platform - like RME. So bear that in mind. Just make sure you have a 30-day return policy on whatever interface you get!


----------



## samphony (Feb 23, 2018)

I have the quantum and used it on feature film productions with logic and mainly pro tools and cubase while working with Jóhann Jóhannsson who eventually had to lend me an Apollo cause the quantum sometimes lost its connection and I had to power cycle it. All in a Mac based environment.

But this happened only 3 to 4 times. It’s working flawlessly with low buffer settings but as Charlie pointed out it has no internal routing capabilities like motu or RME offer. I wish the monitor and headphone outs where remote controllable on the Quantum.

It is reliably working now, there was a recent software update. I’m still undecided if I will keep it but as I’m setting up a pro tools hd stemming system I might go a similar route like Charlie. I had my eyes on the motu and rme stuff for a long time or maybe going with the Focusrite 4pre and other Dante or MADI stuff. I will find out in a couple of weeks.

So for a pure plain thunderbolt interface working cross
plattform on Mac/pc quantum is a good choice.


----------



## sostenuto (Feb 23, 2018)

charlieclouser said:


> I just hope you'll have no problems with the MOTU stuff on Windows -
> I do like the MOTU boxes for the expandability and reasonable cost, but other manufacturers may have more of a long history with the Windows platform - like RME. So bear that in mind. Just make sure you have a 30-day return policy on whatever interface you get!



Great follow-up advice and 'due-diligence' will be pursued. 
Long-time Amazon Prime user here, and they have been exceptional when rare problems have occurred.


----------



## kitekrazy (Feb 23, 2018)

chillbot said:


> No one ever talks about MOTU interfaces here. Are they still commonly used? It made me think, I've been using three MOTU 2408mk3s for seemingly forever, since whenever the mk3 first came out, all via PCI-e. They run just flawless at 128 samples per buffer, Sonar reports 5.2ms roundtrip latency. It's the part of my setup I think about the least.
> 
> 
> I'm not. OP forgot to ask what the best interface is for $59.



I think this was covered in another thread. I don't need low latency but I'm still getting a lot of mileage off my 2 M-Audio 2496, AP 192. Some of the recent boards I have still have PCI slots. The APs work fine. Not all PCI cards will. These were well built units that cost me between $99-$149. It's also great that Windows has great legacy support.


----------

