# Audio Interface for Large orchestral templates?



## MoeWalsaad (Oct 7, 2018)

Hello,
My target is simply to get a newer Audio interface that has a high capacity/Features to handles large Orchestral midi templates and lots of Insert effects, with *the least amount of Crackles/Glitches/Latency.*

The number of audio input slots is not a priority since I rarely record multiple live stuff.

Brand doesn't matter, but I'm a Cubase user, and I'm aware that Steinberg has some Audio Interfaces that (could) push Cubase's performance, yet I don't know if it worth it, or how it's better than other brands.

Thanks in Advance.


----------



## MrCambiata (Oct 7, 2018)

I've just bought RME Digiface usb. It's the cheapest RME audio interface and so small it would fit in your pocket. The drivers are rock solid. However, there are no outputs besides headphones and no microphone inputs. Just wanted to be extremely mobile.
The other interface that I have is Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 which is also very good and budget friendly. Never had any problems with it either when working on orchestral staff.


----------



## jneebz (Oct 7, 2018)

Probably should consider FocusRite in the budget category, mostly for the quality preamps.

https://focusrite.com/scarlett


----------



## ThomasL (Oct 7, 2018)

If you're not aiming to record anything then use the built-in audio, no audio card will help you with what you want help with. You seem to want a fast computer though.


----------



## gsilbers (Oct 7, 2018)

virtual instruments and audio tracks would still be going out the main mix so just a stereo out would suffice and the number of outputs or inputs wouldnt matter in performance.. just price. 
Id say go with something better than usb2. maybe usbc/thunderbolt pice. thats where the issue would lie for big project playbacks. usb2 deal with "packets" of info and those get stuck sometimes.. or slow.. to me at least. 
the apollo twin mk2 or arrow might be usefu.. id say the apollo twin mk2 since it also offers optical in which might help in the future if you want to add an 8 channel preamp like the focusrite or whatever. also it has the quad core processing for uad plugins so you can add mixing effects outside the processing of your daw. this gives you less issues when handling large projects. latency might be an issue... but look into it as some posts of newer models say its not an issue. 
but motu, audient or UAD interfaces with usbC/thunderbolt and similar amount of ins/outs will be about the same really when dealing with performance, sound quality and price.


----------



## steveo42 (Oct 7, 2018)

If you are using VSTi the RTL (round trip latency) is extremely important and in particular how well the interface performs under load. So more tracks, lower buffer settings is more load. The most important factor by far is the stability of the unit's driver software. That is what is going to give you crackle free recording at very low latency so you don't feel/hear the delay between pressing the key and hearing the sound. Having a fast disk for samples, SSD, WD Black if a spinner etc and a decently powered system of course contributes as well but the driver is really the make or break point for stability. You also want an interface that has a specific ASIO driver written for it. Some manufacturers, like RME for example, develop their drivers in house and that is why they are probably the most stable and highest performing interfaces. Many others farm out the driver development to firms like THESYCON and you will see varying results depending on the interface manufacturer. Also for someone who is recording real instruments, they can use the "direct monitoring feature" of their interface and achieve near zero latency that way. You can't, unfortunately do that with VSTi or using amp simulators etc.

With that in mind, my recommendation is :

1. RME
2. MOTU AVB units
3. Presonus Quantum, and ONLY the Quantum models. Avoid the Studio series.

Here is a mega thread with benchmarks:

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/mus...erface-low-latency-performance-data-base.html

Best wishes.


----------



## jmauz (Oct 7, 2018)

I used to use a Focusrite Scarlett with my 600+ track template. Heck I've even used the built-in audio as has been suggested. 

If you aren't recording audio then it really doesn't matter...the audio interface won't make much difference in terms of performance. What you want is lots of RAM, fast disc I/O (read: solid state drives) and if you're running lots of plugins, as many cores in your CPU as you can afford.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 7, 2018)

As other people have implied, the size of your template is irrelevant.

You just want a good audio interface. All things being equal (such as the number of ins and outs), the more you pay the better the sound quality.

People here will generally recommend the interface they bought - interspersed with silly stuff about drivers - but that basic guideline is unlikely to steer you wrong. 

Do you have a concept of the features you'll need? That's a good starting point.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Oct 7, 2018)

steveo42 said:


> If you are using VSTi the RTL (round trip latency) is extremely important and in particular how well the interface performs under load.



Can you (or someone) explain this in more detail as it looks like there are contradicting opinions in this thread.

From my own experience I can add that for a while I thought I did not need an audio interface at all (using optical out for stereo). Then I wanted to add the ability to have 5.1 surround and that is not possible with optical (only compressed audio signals). I switched to HDMI out and the trouble started (Latency, crackles, everything bad imaginable...). For a while I did not think it had something to do with HDMI but obviously it did, because when I finally pulled out my old MOTU Ultralite (Firewire over Thunderbolt adapter) things were going WAY better immediately! (BTW my computer is an Apple trashcan with plenty of RAM/power/SSDs).

Now I would really love to know what is really going on. If I only use virtual instruments (Kontakt etc) isn't it all done in the computer (DAW) BEFORE the final audio stream is being sent to the audio interface or audio out of the computer? What is this "roundtrip latency"? Why does it seem to be better with an audio interface and why does HDMI seem so utterly useless?


----------



## steveo42 (Oct 7, 2018)

Wunderhorn said:


> Can you (or someone) explain this in more detail as it looks like there are contradicting opinions in this thread.
> 
> From my own experience I can add that for a while I thought I did not need an audio interface at all (using optical out for stereo). Then I wanted to add the ability to have 5.1 surround and that is not possible with optical (only compressed audio signals). I switched to HDMI out and the trouble started (Latency, crackles, everything bad imaginable...). For a while I did not think it had something to do with HDMI but obviously it did, because when I finally pulled out my old MOTU Ultralite (Firewire over Thunderbolt adapter) things were going WAY better immediately! (BTW my computer is an Apple trashcan with plenty of RAM/power/SSDs).
> 
> Now I would really love to know what is really going on. If I only use virtual instruments (Kontakt etc) isn't it all done in the computer (DAW) BEFORE the final audio stream is being sent to the audio interface or audio out of the computer? What is this "roundtrip latency"? Why does it seem to be better with an audio interface and why does HDMI seem so utterly useless?




View this:


----------



## Chris Richter (Oct 8, 2018)

steveo42 said:


> If you are using VSTi the RTL (round trip latency) is extremely important and in particular how well the interface performs under load. So more tracks, lower buffer settings is more load. The most important factor by far is the stability of the unit's driver software. That is what is going to give you crackle free recording at very low latency so you don't feel/hear the delay between pressing the key and hearing the sound. Having a fast disk for samples, SSD, WD Black if a spinner etc and a decently powered system of course contributes as well but the driver is really the make or break point for stability. You also want an interface that has a specific ASIO driver written for it. Some manufacturers, like RME for example, develop their drivers in house and that is why they are probably the most stable and highest performing interfaces. Many others farm out the driver development to firms like THESYCON and you will see varying results depending on the interface manufacturer. Also for someone who is recording real instruments, they can use the "direct monitoring feature" of their interface and achieve near zero latency that way. You can't, unfortunately do that with VSTi or using amp simulators etc.
> 
> With that in mind, my recommendation is :
> 
> ...


This is the way to go. Click the link and read. The author has a website linked which goes into some details.
The recommendations are spot on. Maybe add an Apollo Twin Thunderbolt. With USB only RME is an option as far as my research goes.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Oct 8, 2018)

steveo42 said:


> View this:



This is a very good video explaining CPU performance vs realtime. However, it does not explain how you benefit from an audio interface or why it would affect the real time performance in a onboard (e.g. optical, HDMI) vs. audio interface scenario.


----------



## Chris Richter (Oct 8, 2018)

Wunderhorn said:


> This is a very good video explaining CPU performance vs realtime. However, it does not explain how you benefit from an audio interface or why it would affect the real time performance in a onboard (e.g. optical, HDMI) vs. audio interface scenario.


Well, it does. It states that bad written drivers block the cpu for a longer time, hence the real time performance suffers. If the connection via HDMI (= onboard driver) blocks the cpu for too long, then performance is bad. If you have an interface with good drivers then real time performance will be good (as long as there are no other devices, that block the cpu).
It's not as indepth as one might like on that specific part. But if that is what it comes down to...

So what you can do: download the software mentioned in the video and analyze you performance. Try to improve by deactivating things (be careful!!!). If it actually is the onboard audio, then you know, that you will need to improve. Then go to the linked website and study the listed interfaces and choose a good one.

Thats all taken from the video. Doesn't that help?


----------



## Wunderhorn (Oct 8, 2018)

CQrity said:


> Thats all taken from the video. Doesn't that help?



The information on the video is only geared towards Windows users. On the Mac I already have done whatever equivalents are possible.

In addition, I found an interesting tool that is made to measure this roundtrip latency of an interface. I did a quick and dirty test with my MOTU and the onboard digital out. The program reported too many inconsistencies as alerts, so I am not sure if the measured results are anywhere correct or even if the program is functioning properly. In any case the results were very close in numbers which would suggest not much advantage using the audio interface over using digital out.
When I have time I will try this again after restarting the computer, resetting all gear and running no other apps.

You can find this tool here:
https://www.oblique-audio.com/tmp/beta.html


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 8, 2018)

CQrity said:


> It states that bad written drivers block the cpu for a longer time, hence the real time performance suffers



Richard is right, but which interfaces have badly written drivers nowadays? This is what we in the art world call a *mature technology.*

I suggest focusing on the sound quality and features, not stuff about drivers.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 8, 2018)

Wunderhorn said:


> On the Mac I already have done whatever equivalents are possible



The way to measure latency is to record audio from one track onto another track using a cable from an interface's output to an input. You'll see the distance between the waveforms in the DAW.

But really, I wouldn't worry about the latency spec of your interface. The buffer setting in your DAW dwarfs the 3ms most interfaces have (at 44.1/48kHz). If you can work at a 256 sample or lower, you're probably fine.

I haven't read what Mac you're using, but that's what makes the biggest difference, and that's when the size of your template makes a difference.

And yeah, of course you're going to get different opinions on the Internet. The trick is to figure out which people to listen to - which rules me out right away.


----------



## Chris Richter (Oct 8, 2018)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Richard is right, but which interfaces have badly written drivers nowadays? This is what we in the art world call a *mature technology.*
> 
> I suggest focusing on the sound quality and features, not stuff about drivers.


Well, did you take a look over to the gearslutz link? There is some good reasoning going on which made sense to me. So the answer would be: a whole lot if not most of them are poorly written. But if you are fine with some Steinberg interface, then fine, go with it 
Whatever works is the way to go.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 8, 2018)

I didn't look at the Gearslutz link. But iConnectivity was a writing client of mine for about three years, and their interfaces work well just using the standard macOS CoreAudio driver.


----------



## ChristopherDoucet (Oct 8, 2018)

Focusrite Rednet 1 with 2 PCI cards. 

AMAZING!

Couldnt be happier.


----------



## gsilbers (Oct 8, 2018)

yeah, i woudnt look too much into it in general. interfaces like motu, rme, apollo and even scarlett and behringer have been around for a while and know how to compete in the marketplace. its the audiophiles looking way too hard to find something. there might be something here or there but its also dependent on the user, its system and os. 
souund quality in and out is also good on these. performance is good for most users and so on. 
It's creating a mountain out of a molehill sort of thing. 
id say the only time encountering an issue is when im trying to use a device that also is trying to be an audio interface. like using my virus TI as an audio interface. or using rack eleven and so on. quality and perfoance in general suffer imo. 

for example. HDMI is normally a thing not used in real time when composing. its out of the interface onto a set of speakers on a proper calibrated system. and then do a bounce and on a new session or player do a qc using hdmi if a 5.1 is being asked for. 
hdmi has a video lag latency as well btw.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Oct 8, 2018)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> I haven't read what Mac you're using (...)



Trashcan.

It is interesting though that still I cannot find a good reason that is backed up by technical explanations and facts anywhere on forums etc. why someone who uses only VIs would even need an audio interface provided their computer has an appropriate audio output. (Of course for audio recordings and 5.1 there is a different scenario). What is it exactly that an audio interface does that the digital out or analog out of a computer cannot? It moves an audio stream from the computer to an amp/preamp/processor, what have you. A cable does that too. What am I actually missing?

I started wondering if I am missing something here since I have varying occurrences of pops and clicks when those clearly should not occur. That got me thinking if it had something to do with using an audio interface vs not using one.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Oct 8, 2018)

gsilbers said:


> for example. HDMI is normally a thing not used in real time when composing. its out of the interface onto a set of speakers on a proper calibrated system. and then do a bounce and on a new session or player do a qc using hdmi if a 5.1 is being asked for.
> hdmi has a video lag latency as well btw.



Yeah, I tried that out because I was thinking - wow, I can have a digital 5.1 signal go to my pre-amp without having to go analog and therefore should be a great and rock-solid solution. In theory. Turned out I was obviously very wrong. Using HDMI proved to be disastrous on my Mac with Logic Pro. I wish Pre-amps/Processors would have a USB or Thunderbolt option to plug in your computer but they never have. Always HDMI and for 5.1 maybe analog - if you are lucky.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 8, 2018)

The built-in audio analog output doesn't sound all that great, so you use the built-in digital output.

That needs to be converted to analog. You could just get a D/A converter for that, but it probably makes more sense - financially and practically - to get an audio interface designed for the purpose.

Pops and clicks can be caused by a number of things. I assume you've tried raising your processing buffer? Your computer should be powerful enough not to complain if it's set up properly.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Oct 8, 2018)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> That needs to be converted to analog. You could just get a D/A converter for that, but it probably makes more sense - financially and practically - to get an audio interface designed for the purpose.



Yes, after I plugged my old MOTU Ultralite back in the chain it was definitely better.
However, just for the record - in this case - theoretically - a $50 Behringer cheapo should do it too - and in regards to the OP - regardless of the size of your template...



Nick Batzdorf said:


> Pops and clicks can be caused by a number of things. I assume you've tried raising your processing buffer? Your computer should be powerful enough not to complain if it's set up properly.



Yes, I raised buffer, but it did not change the situation. And I researched the best Kontakt and VE-Pro settings pretty thoroughly to where I should assume my settings for those are within an appropriate range.

After watching this little smart video that was suggested earlier in this thread I am thinking of disconnecting all unused USB gear. I also have an older second screen that runs on a funky and pretty bad adapter (no better alternative available). Maybe I should invest in a new 2nd screen that connects directly to a second display port. All this with the idea in mind that there should be less elements involved that can possibly hamper the CPU in terms of those waiting cycles. Not sure what else I could do, WiFi and Bluetooth are turned off as well.


----------



## steveo42 (Oct 9, 2018)

Just to clarify a couple of items based upon the comments and questions.
First, there are several distinct issues here.

1. The sound of an inexpensive interface vs a high dollar interface for those of use working with VSTi, in the box if you will. So not recording real instruments much.

2. The latency factor.

3. The clicks and pops factor.

So starting with #1, yes there are differences in sound between using the on-board sound chips vs an external card but typically it's less of a difference, at least for modern hardware, than the golden eared folks (not me BTW) will admit to. Granted, take an MAudio or Echo Gina/Layla card from a decade or more ago and compare it to modern hardware, even on-board hardware, and literally ANYONE will hear the difference. That difference BTW is mostly, the analog circuitry on the board and less so the DAC. So for example, when I migrated from my decades old Delta 1010 card to a MOTU Ultralite AVB, the difference blew me away. Again, I am NOT the guy who typically hears differences between converters. A converter snob if you will. But this time it was easily noticeable. Kind of like a blanket was lifted from in front of my monitors.

But I digress, most of the differences people hear and write about between interfaces are with regards to the pre-amps. Major, major differences there.
No question about it. However if you are ITB, it doesn't affect you.

I would NOT get hung up on reviews regarding the sound of a particular interface. For the most part, I lump them with audiophile reviews of amplifiers.


So now #2, latency.. This is where the rubber meets the road. Some interfaces simply are able to perform well under load, so that's your huge template stuff, than other ones do. And again, it's not always price dependent. A lowly Zoom interface has reports of excellent latency and under load, the under load part is very important BTW as bragging rights on an RTL test like Oblique means nothing if you can only play a single instrument at that low buffer settings without cracks and pops.
And once again this comes with certain qualifications. Some people don't hear/feel latency and if your cutting and pasting beats and recording pads with one finger it probably won't bother you. However if you are a performer, drummer entering via an electronic kit or keyboard player who can actually play with all 10 fingers at once (no insult intended here) or if you use a lot of percussive type sounds, the latency is going to drive you nuts. And once again, our friends recording real instruments don't deal with this much because they can use the direct monitoring features of their audio card vs us folks having to monitor through the DAW.

3. Pops and Clicks. 
The audio card driver has the biggest effect on this by far. This is also coupled to latency. The better cards can run more tracks of VSTi at lower buffer settings and without clicks and pops. Of course, with Windows many other factors contribute. Things like USB power management, Power Scheme and so forth. There are entire websites devoted to this kind of stuff.

So, Windows users have it more difficult than Mac users which further complicates things. And to further complicate things some very expensive cards have awful Windows drivers and some modestly priced cards have excellent Windows drivers.
With Apple it's almost a case of plug it in and it works. Not always, but the odds are much better.

So final recommendation is, use a dedicated audio card. Make sure it has a solid ASIO driver and decide what your must haves are. For me, round trip latency via a solid driver is key. I can always expand via ADAT, Spidf etc to get more inputs, better pre-amps and so forth, but a base interface with a crappy driver will drive me crazy.

Best wishes to all!
And happy hunting.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Oct 9, 2018)

steveo42 said:


> Some interfaces simply are able to perform well under load,



Here is what I do not understand - and first, thanks for your input! - what does it actually mean, "under load"? As far as my knowledge goes a DAW outputs two audio streams, left and right. Maybe 6 channels for 5.1, ok.

Everything else, all tracks, plugins etc. are processed before that in the computer (given you don't use external hardware that generates or processes sound) and their sum is what goes to the "main out". So, what difference would it make to an audio interface if you have 200 tracks playing or only one? What goes out to the interface is still one stream of left/right, no? So, where does the "load" come from? What does the latency of the audio interface have to do with the number of tracks I am playing? Based on the video earlier in this thread the audio interface is only waiting for the audio chunks to arrive in time. It is up to the computer and its configuration to be delivering the audio packets on time (real-time performance). Did I miss something?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 9, 2018)

Wunderhorn said:


> I am thinking of disconnecting all unused USB gear



That seems like a stretch to me.

I mean, sure, try it. But I'd be very surprised if it made a difference.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 9, 2018)

Wunderhorn said:


> what does it actually mean, "under load"?



It takes a certain amount of processing just to have a bunch of stuff loaded and idle.

Take a look at Activity Monitor (Utilities folder). It'll show you if any of your processors are spiking.

I kinda doubt it if you have a trashcan Mac Pro. They're not wimpy computers.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Oct 9, 2018)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> It takes a certain amount of processing just to have a bunch of stuff loaded and idle.



No doubt, but still - what does this have to do with the audio interface? The pops and crackles are happening because something in the computer isn't fast enough in regards to real-time performance (whatever the cause is) but the audio interface and its latency or otherwise quality don't seem to matter... I still don't get the connection between the two.

Why would "under load" a "better" audio interface (e.g. my MOTU Ultralite) be of advantage over a cheap "not so good" (e.g. $50 Behringer) one or even built in digital out? Would the bottleneck not occur before the audio stream hits the interface, speak in the computer and DAW configuration?


----------



## Saxer (Oct 10, 2018)

My RME Fireface power supply died and I replaced it temporary by a Focusrite Scarlett for the repair time of the RME. Main differences was: the output level of the Scarlett was much lower so I had more noise floor from the amps. I'm not a hifi junky but getting my RME back was a blessing for listening comfort. And the RME drivers are fast. I can go lower in latency with RME. And with built in audio outs you get unbalanced connections which will hum on longer cable ways.
All of that doesn't concern your output when you work in the box only. But you would never hear the sound quality that's in your box.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 10, 2018)

Wunderhorn said:


> No doubt, but still - what does this have to do with the audio interface?



It's all cumulative. It could be the last straw.



> The pops and crackles are happening because something in the computer isn't fast enough in regards to real-time performance (whatever the cause is) but the audio interface and its latency or otherwise quality don't seem to matter... I still don't get the connection between the two.



You're probably ahead of me, but generically it's not a given that clicks and pops are due to the processor spiking. There are a few other things that can cause it.



> Why would "under load" a "better" audio interface (e.g. my MOTU Ultralite) be of advantage over a cheap "not so good" (e.g. $50 Behringer) one or even built in digital out? Would the bottleneck not occur before the audio stream hits the interface, speak in the computer and DAW configuration?



It could be something other than a bottleneck, such as a digital sync issue.

Again, I'd suggest taking a look at Activity Monitor, specifically the CPU monitor meters to see whether processors are spiking.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Oct 11, 2018)

So, the audio interface can only offer a maybe a somewhat lower buffer setting but won't help the DAW in any way to get the load handled in the first place...
Which means (sound quality aside) a little $29 Behringer interface won't make a significant difference to a $2000+ RME in terms of handling load. Just being able to run the same 'load' a a few notches of buffer settings lower.
Which also should mean that reasons for crackles and pops should primarily have a different source.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Oct 12, 2018)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> It's all cumulative. It could be the last straw.



I don't know where I might be ahead of you - it feels more like I am more behind than anything else because I seem not to be able to get my audio issues fixed... 

Anyway, first and foremost I was trying to get more of an understanding on what role the audio interface plays in general and that was sparked by the OP's question in the first place. I understand that my specific issues might be a whole other can of worms altogether but whatever connection there might be I wanted to find out more about it.

I wish I had a RME thunderbolt interface just to run a test and see if it has anything to do with the interface in my case. But since I do not, I am eager to learn about it in general so i can make better educated guesses when it come to the next trouble shooting rounds.


----------



## steveo42 (Oct 13, 2018)

Wunderhorn said:


> I don't know where I might be ahead of you - it feels more like I am more behind than anything else because I seem not to be able to get my audio issues fixed...
> 
> Anyway, first and foremost I was trying to get more of an understanding on what role the audio interface plays in general and that was sparked by the OP's question in the first place. I understand that my specific issues might be a whole other can of worms altogether but whatever connection there might be I wanted to find out more about it.
> 
> I wish I had a RME thunderbolt interface just to run a test and see if it has anything to do with the interface in my case. But since I do not, I am eager to learn about it in general so i can make better educated guesses when it come to the next trouble shooting rounds.



In the broad sense, and in a given system, the interface and it's driver is the most important factor in determining how low a latency can be achieved and how many VSTi or things like amp sims can be played at the same time before pops and crackles appear. If you look at the system used in the Gearslutz thread it is an ancient system and that choice was made so that the data collected over years could be compared on an even plain.
It also explains (shown in the video) why some people with mega systems still have problems with DPC spiking and so forth.

You are correct, configuration and system type does play a part in this as well but this is much, much less than the Windows XP / 7 days and assuming the well known basic tweaks are done, power scheme, fast samples drive etc the system is less of a cause for problems than a poorly written device driver is.

So when talking purely how low a buffer, and thus low latency, can I run and be stable, you are talking about the card and the driver for the most part. So a card with a poor driver will perform poorly in a modest system and will perform just as poorly in a mega i9 system.

And like everything else in life there are exceptions to the rules. Some system boards have more DPC problems than others and some inexpensive cards manage to get very low latency as well. Best to research your particular combination before committing. The DUC site is an excellent place to find builds that are known to work well with ProTools and we all know that if a system works well with ProTools, which can be finicky about hardware, chances are excellent it will work well with other DAWs.

http://duc.avid.com/index.php


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 13, 2018)

steveo42 said:


> In the broad sense, and in a given system, the interface and it's driver is the most important factor



He's using a Mac.


----------



## steveo42 (Oct 14, 2018)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> He's using a Mac.



The card still has a driver, albeit a core audio driver rather than an ASIO one so it's still the final responsibility of the interface manufacturer to develop a solid driver. Oblique has a beta version of it's RTL measurement utility which was previously Windows only and early reports from testers are showing very similar RTL results for a given interface as compared to Windows.
Where the Mac is superior is there is much less need to fiddle around with settings in the OS and things like that compared to Windows. Even that is changing though and sites like Black Viper, a tweak site, are much less relevant now than just a few years ago.

Another consideration is that some interface manufacturers focus on Apple and Windows is somewhat of an afterthought. This is not so much the case anymore as it was in the past but still a consideration.

Overall, I think the Mac users definitely have things easier than the Windows users but things are a lot better than they used to be.
Some days I'm jealous of how much less fuss it is to work on the Mac platform 

As always it's best to do the research prior to making a purchase no matter what platform is being used. It's real easy to get caught up in the hype and make a very expensive mistake.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 14, 2018)

steveo42 said:


> The card still has a driver, albeit a core audio driver rather than an ASIO one



Right, but some are just Class-Compliant, i.e. they don't use a third-party driver.


----------



## steveo42 (Oct 14, 2018)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Right, but some are just Class-Compliant, i.e. they don't use a third-party driver.


Yes, that is correct at least for the driver part. Those will work under Linux as well, which is always a good thing.


----------



## Wunderhorn (Oct 16, 2018)

steveo42 said:


> Some days I'm jealous of how much less fuss it is to work on the Mac platform



Thanks, well, at least I know now that with a buffer setting of 512 or even 1024 I should at least be able to run a VE-Pro driven template of 150 tracks safely regardless of any audio interface.
And _with_ my Firewire MOTU Ultralite, even though it is a an older model, I should be able to choose much better latency. Neither is the case though, unfortunately. I cannot play 2 tracks without hiccups. But that I will have to investigate further when I have time again.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 16, 2018)

You shouldn't have to work with a buffer that large.

I set mine at 128 samples (streaming off SSDs).


----------



## steveo42 (Oct 16, 2018)

Wunderhorn said:


> Thanks, well, at least I know now that with a buffer setting of 512 or even 1024 I should at least be able to run a VE-Pro driven template of 150 tracks safely regardless of any audio interface.
> And _with_ my Firewire MOTU Ultralite, even though it is a an older model, I should be able to choose much better latency. Neither is the case though, unfortunately. I cannot play 2 tracks without hiccups. But that I will have to investigate further when I have time again.



There is definitely something seriously amiss there.


----------

