# RME: Why You Don't Need Thunderbolt For Professional Audio



## Pier




----------



## Nick Batzdorf

Interesting. Amazingly, I watched that through to the end - and I never watch things like that through to the end. 

The biggest takeaway for me was confirmation of something I said many times - until I was convinced that I was wrong by people here who sounded like they knew more than I do about this: that the bandwidth doesn't affect the data transfer speed, just the amount of data that can be transmitted. They even have an obligatory car analogy to illustrate the point.


----------



## FireGS

Great video -- and at the same explains exactly why higher _bandwidth _devices _are _needed_._


----------



## Pier

Off topic but... if RME released a smaller and cheaper version of their Babyface USB interface it would take the whole budget market by storm.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

Pier said:


> Off topic but... if RME released a smaller and cheaper version of their Babyface USB interface it would take the whole budget market by storm.


You'd think that about several companies. And the traditional strategy is to come out with high-end products and then use the prestige to market budget ones.

But there are also companies that simply aren't interested in doing that for one reason or another. They make higher-end products and that's that.


----------



## cet34f

I didn't even open the video because the title is so wrong. We are not asking "why still usb". We are asking "why still usb type A".


----------



## FireGS

cet34f said:


> I didn't even open the video because the title is so wrong. We are not asking "why still usb". We are asking "why still usb type A".


Probably because it's still the most robust USB connector type besides USB 3.0 Type B. Mini, micro, and C are all really flimsy...


----------



## kgdrum

Why USB? Because it works.
I use a UCX I/O via USB and have absolutely no problems. Previously I used a FF800 via FireWire and when I switched to the UCX the RME rep here in the USA @SynthAx - Jeff who knows what he’s talking about and I trust implicitly recommended USB over FireWire which are both available on my Mac and the UCX. I was somewhat skeptical but it’s been flawless for several years. 
It just works and it really works well.


----------



## KEM

Yeah but Apple uses Thunderbolt so therefore it’s better


----------



## Pier

cet34f said:


> I didn't even open the video because the title is so wrong. We are not asking "why still usb". We are asking "why still usb type A".


Because it's still the most prevalent USB port across the whole industry.

So much so, that Apple backpedaled on the idea of having only USB-C connectors for any professional machine.


----------



## FireGS

I will say this -- I find it kinda silly that RME would put this video out while still having some high end products that are USB (3) and dont support some widely-available USB chipsets. Fun fine-print kinda stuff that you don't find out until after buying the device and wonder why there's CRC errors all over the place and its buried 100-some pages in the back of the manual...................






Nearly all current-gen AMD motherboards come stock with ASMedia chipsets. And their AMD-USB-3 implementation is kind of an outright lie.

I digress.


----------



## SupremeFist

Nick Batzdorf said:


> But there are also companies that simply aren't interested in doing that for one reason or another. They make higher-end products and that's that.


Yeah I assume they've done the math on how much more it would cost them to support a massive influx of noobs for whom this is their first audio interface, and figured it's not worth it. (Plus my impression is that they're a brand that only pros and prosumers/serious amateurs have even heard of.)


----------



## Paylight

Nick Batzdorf said:


> just the amount of data that can be transmitted


I thought it important for the I/O and RTL [round trip latency] figures to be factors on the choice audio cards _also_


----------



## mscp

KEM said:


> Yeah but Apple uses Thunderbolt so therefore it’s better


You've lost your German efficiency privileges. Now go.


----------



## GtrString

RMEs ideals reads more like an excuse. Just get on with it and implement TB


----------



## mscp

GtrString said:


> RMEs ideals reads more like an excuse. Just get on with it and implement TB


Look at the back of most PC motherboards and try to locate TB ports.


----------



## FireGS

mscp said:


> Look at the back of most PC motherboards and try to locate TB ports.


or TB headers on PC motherboards to support add-on cards. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## José Herring

GtrString said:


> RMEs ideals reads more like an excuse. Just get on with it and implement TB


Yes. They managed to state that USB 2.0 is good enough for the common people but you'll need 3.0 or Thunderbolt if you aim for higher than tracks on Spotify.


----------



## KEM

GtrString said:


> RMEs ideals reads more like an excuse. Just get on with it and implement TB



Agreed



mscp said:


> Look at the back of most PC motherboards and try to locate TB ports.



That’s your first problem, you’re using a PC


----------



## José Herring

mscp said:


> Look at the back of most PC motherboards and try to locate TB ports.


I have two TB3 ports on my PC mobo. They're out there.


----------



## FireGS

José Herring said:


> I have two TB3 ports on my PC mobo. They're out there.


More common as Intel starts to support TB4.


----------



## KEM

FireGS said:


> More common as Intel starts to support TB4.



Isn’t Thunderbolt actually an Intel product?


----------



## FireGS

KEM said:


> Isn’t Thunderbolt actually an Intel product?


Intel *for* Apple, but now they're pushing harder to implement TB natively with newer generations of Intel/PC chipsets.


----------



## José Herring

FireGS said:


> More common as Intel starts to support TB4.


Can't wait. Other than the connectors being kind of flimsy I general do enjoy using TB audio interfaces. Maybe it's overkill but honestly even in the most dense orchestrations I'm using one machine and can't get my CPU meter to hit more than 40%.


----------



## José Herring

KEM said:


> Isn’t Thunderbolt actually an Intel product?


It's open to everybody now. Intel products will probably call it USB4 though.


----------



## Pier

José Herring said:


> I have two TB3 ports on my PC mobo. They're out there.


Actually I've had a USB-C port on PC even before Macs had it.


----------



## Paylight

Apple iPads support USB


----------



## mscp

FireGS said:


> or TB headers on PC motherboards to support add-on cards. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Why spend more if USB 2.0 is fine? Use the money for something else.


----------



## gsilbers

yeah.. i think everyone was complaining about the type of connector. USB-c is the one being used for most laptops and macs.
Have usbc type connector but can have a usb type a on the other end. but making it standard to be usb type c connector so we dont have to buy odd cables and move forward from printer cables.

I do remember a time many where saying firewire is better than usb. something about having more bandwidth at the same time.. or something i forget.





__





USB, Firewire & Thunderbolt: Which Is Best For Audio?


If you’re choosing a new audio interface or a new computer, what are the pros and cons of the many different connection protocols that are on offer?




www.soundonsound.com





I have now a motu ultralite 5 with usb c and i can have either usb a or c on the other end. smaller connector.


At the end of the day imo all it matters are good drivers. I dont know why audio interface threads are soooo long. filled with charts, numbers, math etc. so wierd.


----------



## mscp

KEM said:


> That’s your first problem, you’re using a PC


PCs are great. In fact, my i9 9900k is more stable than my current M1 Max (due to developers being super slow at porting their stuff to the new architecture - ugh).



José Herring said:


> I have two TB3 ports on my PC mobo. They're out there.


I know. But I have not seen many mobos that do. But, I don't often look for stuff much since my gear still has some years left.

Point is, why bother changing something that literally won't provide any benefit whatsoever and will force many to buy new peripherals for? Oh wait, that's Apple and its chargers. Nevermind. lol.

It's like saying: "let's all use thunderbolt to power up our dongles." It doesn't make sense, and a lot of people would end up having to buy more stuff for no reason.

Unless of course, people love to spend frivolously...that's a whole other thing.


----------



## FireGS

mscp said:


> Why spend more if USB 2.0 is fine? Use the money for something else.


Because I'm routing 110 audio channels


----------



## mscp

FireGS said:


> Because I'm routing 110 audio channels


USB 3.0 is more than capable of it and it's widely supported. Every PC/Mac has USB 3.0+ ports.


----------



## FireGS

mscp said:


> USB 3.0 is more than capable of it and it's widely supported.


"supported".


----------



## mscp

FireGS said:


> "supported".


Never had an issue with my UFX+.


----------



## FireGS

mscp said:


> Never had an issue with my UFX+.


The problem is that most devices that "support" high channel count are either TB only, or use USB2 as a fallback with drastically cut (by half) channels. There aren't a ton of devices that are USB3 that support nearly 128 bi-directional channels (or rather, 256 channels).

Yep, a very fringe case.


----------



## mscp

FireGS said:


> The problem is that most devices that "support" high channel count are either TB only, or use USB2 as a fallback with drastically cut (by half) channels. There aren't a ton of devices that are USB3 that support nearly 128 bi-directional channels (or rather, 256 channels).
> 
> Yep, a very fringe case.


Well, I run 188 channels at 24bit 48khz just fine with USB 3.0. Tracking at 64samples buffer and mixing at 512samples.


----------



## Paylight

mscp said:


> Tracking at 64samples buffer


What RTL do you have? 4-5 ms?


----------



## FireGS

mscp said:


> Well, I run 188 channels at 24bit 48khz just fine with USB 3.0. Tracking at 64samples buffer and mixing at 512samples.


What other devices are you running besides the UFX+ to use literally all of the channels the UFX+ has to offer?


----------



## chillbot

I just bought a fancy new (PC) laptop and it showed up with ONLY USB-C ports. What the hell!? It's not like super-thin or anything, they could have fit a standard f-ing USB port or two on there.

Now I have to use an adapter for everything but most aggravating even to plug in a wireless mouse dongle.


----------



## mscp

Paylight said:


> What RTL do you have? 4-5 ms?


3.8


----------



## mscp

FireGS said:


> What other devices are you running besides the UFX+ to use literally all of the channels the UFX+ has to offer?


MADI 64 channels - VEP
ADAT - Modular 
AES/EBU - Outboard
Analogs - Synths


----------



## FireGS

mscp said:


> MADI 64 channels - VEP
> ADAT - Modular
> AES/EBU - Outboard
> Analogs - Synths


Yeah but which devices? I'm just curious.


----------



## cedricm

kgdrum said:


> Why USB? Because it works.
> I use a UCX I/O via USB and have absolutely no problems. Previously I used a FF800 via FireWire and when I switched to the UCX the RME rep here in the USA @SynthAx - Jeff who knows what he’s talking about and I trust implicitly recommended USB over FireWire which are both available on my Mac and the UCX. I was somewhat skeptical but it’s been flawless for several years.
> It just works and it really works well.


To be fair, I've been using my Tascam FW-1884 (Firewire 400) for more than 15 years, flawlessly. 
I'm presently using it under Windows 10, although the latest driver was for Windows XP.

Now that I switched to a TB3 audio interface, I link both via SPDIF and ADAT. 

Since I hadn't enough PCIe lanes to keep the PCIe-Firewire card, I'm connecting the FW-1884 in the following way:

Computer Thunderbolt 3 port to Apple TB3-TB2 adapter (my first Apple purchase ever) 
Apple TB2-Firewire 800 adapter (2nd Apple purchase ever)
Firewire 800-Firewire 400 adapter (forgot the brand) 
Firewire 400-Tascam FW-1884 

I expected the worse, but these shenanigans have been working for months.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

SupremeFist said:


> Yeah I assume they've done the math on how much more it would cost them to support a massive influx of noobs for whom this is their first audio interface, and figured it's not worth it. (Plus my impression is that they're a brand that only pros and prosumers/serious amateurs have even heard of.)


That's certainly one potential reason, but some companies simply aren't interested in going downmarket. Bringing down the cost requires much larger production runs, which means they have to raise money for all kinds of things.

It's like, I dunno, a jazz musician who isn't interested in being a pop star. People really do make decisions about what they want to do with their lives!


----------



## cedricm

mscp said:


> Why spend more if USB 2.0 is fine? Use the money for something else.


A strange comment in an RME thread.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

Paylight said:


> I thought it important for the I/O and RTL [round trip latency] figures to be factors on the choice audio cards _also_


Not according to that video - which you can count on being right. I've had conversations at trade shows with... I can't think of the head of the company's name, but he's a guy who knows his onions. That company isn't going to produce a video like that with wrong information.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

USB-C - which is the connector, not a protocol - is a raging clustershag.

That connector can carry Thunderbots (plural), USB 3.2 and every version below, Displayport, power, various Android shozzle... 

I get the advantage of having just one connector, but they should have asked me first.


----------



## fakemaxwell

Pier said:


> Off topic but... if RME released a smaller and cheaper version of their Babyface USB interface it would take the whole budget market by storm.


How much smaller and cheaper can you get without sacrificing quality?


FireGS said:


> "supported".


RME is DEFINITELY not the only company to not support every possible USB configuration. (For what it's worth, if you need something supported this works well- )

RTL between USB3 and TB (with RME, at least) is negligible, I think it's a .05 ms difference. Slapping a TB connector on an interface that doesn't need it with no other options is unfortunately just lazy engineering.


----------



## Virtuoso

FireGS said:


> Because I'm routing 110 audio channels


Screw USB - you want Dante!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

GtrString said:


> RMEs ideals reads more like an excuse. Just get on with it and implement TB


it reads to me like they released that video to explain a common question: why all but their highest-I/O interfaces (which does use Thunderbolt) only need USB 2, that there would be no advantage to implementing TB.

I'm not in the business of defending RME particularly, in fact I find the line about their drivers being "the best in the business" silly. But they do make excellent products.


----------



## FireGS

Nick Batzdorf said:


> USB-C - which is the connector, not a protocol - is a raging clustershag.
> 
> That connector can carry Thunderbots (plural), USB 3.2 and every version below, Displayport, power, various Android shozzle...
> 
> I get the advantage of having just one connector, but they should have asked me first.


Didn't I read somewhere that USB-C was primarily designed in accordance to an EU directive about reducing e-waste, i.e., cables and chargers?


----------



## FireGS

Virtuoso said:


> Screw USB - you want Dante!


I went AVB. Was cheaper than Dante.


----------



## FireGS

fakemaxwell said:


> How much smaller and cheaper can you get without sacrificing quality?
> 
> RME is DEFINITELY not the only company to not support every possible USB configuration. (For what it's worth, if you need something supported this works well- )
> 
> RTL between USB3 and TB (with RME, at least) is negligible, I think it's a .05 ms difference. Slapping a TB connector on an interface that doesn't need it with no other options is unfortunately just lazy engineering.



It's just weird that USB3 has such a wide variance between devices, chipsets, cables, connectors... What happened to class-compliance and plug-and-play? 😩


----------



## Pier

fakemaxwell said:


> How much smaller and cheaper can you get without sacrificing quality?


I don't know, but I imagine if RME reduced the number of channels, etc, the cost could be brought down.


----------



## rhizomusicosmos

My understanding is that with TB4, USB and Thunderbolt had pretty much converged. Which would mean one connector and one chipset to rule them all, my precious.

I use an RME UFX and still have it connected via Firewire to a Windows 10 i7-10700 PC.


----------



## fakemaxwell

FireGS said:


> It's just weird that USB3 has such a wide variance between devices, chipsets, cables, connectors... What happened to class-compliance and plug-and-play? 😩


Me and my several returns to music stores agree with you... The more time you spend in this world the more you learn that technical specifications are still, somehow, mostly suggestions.


----------



## SomeGuy

Fantastic video! I actually wish more companies would keep using USB. My issue with thunderbolt is the 2 meter cable limit, which makes it very anoying when you want to keep your machine in a machine closet, but keep your audio interface in the studio for recording. I do understand you can get repeaters and optical thunderbolt cable but its very expensive! Would much prefer a long USB cable.


----------



## PaulieDC

cet34f said:


> I didn't even open the video because the title is so wrong. We are not asking "why still usb". We are asking "why still usb type A".


You can't eliminate years of "standardized" devices, USB A is everywhere. Apple's doing it way too early and Mac users get frustrated over it and have to buy a brick to plug everything into.

I'm totally on board with USB-C/Thunderbold, iPads have it but iPhone still doesn't. But it has a problem... the connection is totally flimsy. USB-A walks away with the trophy there, everything I plug in is IN.

It'll happen eventually but not quite yet.


----------



## gordinho

There are basically two engineer driven companies in this audio market segment: RME and Metric Halo.


----------



## mscp

PaulieDC said:


> You can't eliminate years of "standardized" devices, USB A is everywhere. Apple's doing it way too early and Mac users get frustrated over it and have to buy a brick to plug everything into.
> 
> I'm totally on board with USB-C/Thunderbold, iPads have it but iPhone still doesn't. But it has a problem... the connection is totally flimsy. USB-A walks away with the trophy there, everything I plug in is IN.
> 
> It'll happen eventually but not quite yet.


This ^^^

The USB-A standard is still the best. It works, Gens are backwards compatible so you can use old gear, ... and more.


----------



## KEM

gsilbers said:


> At the end of the day imo all it matters are good drivers. I dont know why audio interface threads are soooo long. filled with charts, numbers, math etc. so wierd.



Yep, take Antelope for example, they are known for having very hit or miss drivers and tons of firmware issues and it’s a real shame because their preamps are truly some of the best in the business and I would love to buy one but I just don’t know if I can trust one of their products to last me more than a couple of years and not have issues within the couple of years they actually support the product

For this reason alone I’m getting a UAD Apollo (within the next few weeks, no less) because their preamps are pretty much just as good, they use Thunderbolt 3, and they’re known for having rock solid drivers and firmware, I’ll be getting the Black Lion Audio mods on it too so it’ll really be a beast of an interface


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

gordinho said:


> There are basically two engineer driven companies in this audio market segment: RME and Metric Halo.


Those are the two off the top of my head.

And Lavry. There must be others.


----------



## EvilDragon

My UFX+ is awesome. That is all.

Their USB implementation is entirely bespoke (they make their own USB controller by means of FPGA chip), this is why they can't support each and every USB chipset out there. They have likely tested a lot of them and those that are not supported are very likely not supported for a very good reason. At least that's how it appears to me.


----------



## odod

Pier said:


> Off topic but... if RME released a smaller and cheaper version of their Babyface USB interface it would take the whole budget market by storm.


problem is, RME is a rare item in my country ,,, and it is soo expensive :(


----------



## easyrider

KEM said:


> Agreed
> 
> 
> 
> That’s your first problem, you’re using a PC


Your Apple Fanboism…is getting dull….I have Thunderbolt 3 can upgrade to TB 4 when I want and my PC blows chunks all over your MAC and then some for $1000s less….

Ok thanks bye….😂😜


----------



## LATABOM

Pier said:


> Off topic but... if RME released a smaller and cheaper version of their Babyface USB interface it would take the whole budget market by storm.


I actually don't agree with this statement. RME's appeal is among experienced professionals or people with direct contact and trust with experienced professionals. Marketing to amateurs has never been their strong point and I don't really think it ever will be.

They could definitely make a Focusrite scarlett competitor with better drivers and much longer support, but they'll never be able to match Focusrite (a subsidiary of Harman which is a subsidiary of Samsung) in terms of marketing and the ability to underprice any other manufacturer on the planet.

I've told so many musician colleagues to avoid Focusrite (bad support, poor quality), Apogee (support officially ends 5 years after product is discontinued) and UA (never forget Powercore); my backup interface is a 17 year old FF800 which, other than a replaced power supply 5 years ago, has had no other service, still works as well as the day I bought it and can still compete with modern interfaces. Something like 15000 hours of active uptime! But, first-time buyers either want cheap (focusrite, usually with some shitty inline booster to compensate for not enough and/or noisy gain), or the flashy ads and youtubers (Apogee/UA), and don't think about the fact they'll probably need to buy 2-4 focusrites to get the longevity of an RME.


----------



## will_m

Well I'm glad my UFX+ has TB because if it didn't I'd have to use the USB3 connection which was a complete mess for me even on a supposedly supported chipset. On their own website they state 

"Thunderbolt technology gives the Fireface UFX+ real PCI Express audio performance under Mac and Windows, with lowest latency, lowest system overhead and lowest CPU load."

They are very good at getting the performance of their USB drivers to match close to TB but in all the testing I've seen and my own experience TB gives better results.


----------



## FireGS

EvilDragon said:


> My UFX+ is awesome. That is all.
> 
> Their USB implementation is entirely bespoke (they make their own USB controller by means of FPGA chip), this is why they can't support each and every USB chipset out there. They have likely tested a lot of them and those that are not supported are very likely not supported for a very good reason. At least that's how it appears to me.


If it's bespoke, you'd think that they would think [more] forward and maybe design a chip that works across a broad[er] spectrum. OR at least be a little more up-front about it. Not every country has consumer-friendly return policies.


----------



## mattnedgus

Forgive me if I'm wrong but I thought the whole idea was that Thunderbolt devices have direct access to memory and so miss out an entire layer/process that adds latency? Nothing to do with bandwidth?

EDIT: I just caught the end of the video where this is mentioned. I'd like to see some numbers!


----------



## mscp

easyrider said:


> Your Apple Fanboism…is getting dull….I have Thunderbolt 3 can upgrade to TB 4 when I want and my PC blows chunks all over your MAC and then some for $1000s less….
> 
> Ok thanks bye….😂😜


generally people who spend more for nothing has this kind of complexity. lol.

But yeah, TB in Windows can be done but it's not like it comes with every single board. That's why I prefer USB-A (Whether it's 3.0, 3.1, 3.2...)


----------



## KEM

LATABOM said:


> I actually don't agree with this statement. RME's appeal is among experienced professionals or people with direct contact and trust with experienced professionals. Marketing to amateurs has never been their strong point and I don't really think it ever will be.
> 
> They could definitely make a Focusrite scarlett competitor with better drivers and much longer support, but they'll never be able to match Focusrite (a subsidiary of Harman which is a subsidiary of Samsung) in terms of marketing and the ability to underprice any other manufacturer on the planet.
> 
> I've told so many musician colleagues to avoid Focusrite (bad support, poor quality), Apogee (support officially ends 5 years after product is discontinued) and UA (never forget Powercore); my backup interface is a 17 year old FF800 which, other than a replaced power supply 5 years ago, has had no other service, still works as well as the day I bought it and can still compete with modern interfaces. Something like 15000 hours of active uptime! But, first-time buyers either want cheap (focusrite, usually with some shitty inline booster to compensate for not enough and/or noisy gain), or the flashy ads and youtubers (Apogee/UA), and don't think about the fact they'll probably need to buy 2-4 focusrites to get the longevity of an RME.



How does RME’s signal path (preamps, converters) compare to UAD’s?


----------



## Pier

LATABOM said:


> I actually don't agree with this statement. RME's appeal is among experienced professionals or people with direct contact and trust with experienced professionals. Marketing to amateurs has never been their strong point and I don't really think it ever will be.


It has nothing to do with being a pro or an amateur.

There are lot of pros that do everything in the box and don't need to record. So basically they just need good DA converters, good drivers, and maybe a good headphones amp.


----------



## Dewdman42

Gearspace.com - View Single Post - Audio Interface - Low Latency Performance Data Base


Post 15796206 -Forum for professional and amateur recording engineers to share techniques and advice.



gearspace.com


----------



## KEM

Are the RME preamps better than UAD?


----------



## will_m

mattnedgus said:


> Forgive me if I'm wrong but I thought the whole idea was that Thunderbolt devices have direct access to memory and so miss out an entire layer/process that adds latency? Nothing to do with bandwidth?
> 
> EDIT: I just caught the end of the video where this is mentioned. I'd like to see some numbers!


If you are referring to latency performance numbers I'd recommend checking out the extensive gear space thread on LLP.









Gearspace.com - View Single Post - Audio Interface - Low Latency Performance Data Base


Post 15796206 -Forum for professional and amateur recording engineers to share techniques and advice.



gearspace.com





If I recall there is a small round trip latency difference (about 1ms) and a few percent improvement in plug-in instances before overload when using TB over USB3 (but on certain buffer sizes).


----------



## Pier

KEM said:


> Are the RME preamps better than UAD?


That's like asking if a Moog is better than a Prophet 😂

Depends on what you look for in a preamp. RME preamps are neutral and clean. If you're looking for character you won't get it here.

But if you're really into preamps you will probably have multiple dedicated preamps (tube, mosfet, etc) depending on the mic you're using, the material you're recording, etc.


----------



## KEM

Pier said:


> That's like asking if a Moog is better than a Prophet 😂
> 
> Depends on what you look for in a preamp. RME preamps are neutral and clean. If you're looking for character you won't get it here.
> 
> But if you're really into preamps you will probably have multiple dedicated preamps (tube, mosfet, etc) depending on the mic you're using, the material you're recording, etc.



All I record is my guitar, nothing else, I’m just looking to get the cleanest signal possible and my 7 year old Scarlett 2i2 isn’t cutting it, and I don’t want to spend more than $1,500


----------



## SupremeFist

KEM said:


> All I record is my guitar, nothing else, I’m just looking to get the cleanest signal possible and my 7 year old Scarlett 2i2 isn’t cutting it, and I don’t want to spend more than $1,500


Some people have a beef against Audient for whatever reason, but their jfet guitar inputs are really nice. (Though I usually track guitar through my Helix.)


----------



## Pier

KEM said:


> All I record is my guitar, nothing else, I’m just looking to get the cleanest signal possible and my 7 year old Scarlett 2i2 isn’t cutting it, and I don’t want to spend more than $1,500


To record your guitar you won't be using the mic preamp.

If you only need to record 1-2 channels, Audient has some great offerings for much less than $1,500 and they run great on macOS.

I've also heard great things about the MOTU M2/M4.


----------



## KEM

Pier said:


> To record your guitar you won't be using the mic preamp.
> 
> If you only need to record 1-2 channels, Audient has some great offerings for much less than $1,500 and they run great on macOS.
> 
> I've also heard great things about the MOTU M2/M4.



Then what is my guitar plugged into right now??


----------



## SupremeFist

KEM said:


> Then what is my guitar plugged into right now??


That might be your problem right there.


----------



## Pier

KEM said:


> Then what is my guitar plugged into right now??


You're probably using one of those multi input ports, right?

I've never used a Scarlett but I can see they have a button to tell the interface to use the instrument input instead of the mic preamp.


----------



## KEM

SupremeFist said:


> That might be your problem right there.



Probably lol



Pier said:


> You're probably using one of those multi input ports, right?
> 
> I've never used a Scarlett but I can see they have a button to tell the interface to use the instrument input instead of the mic preamp.



It does but I keep it on line, I’ve tried switching to instrument and my signal clips even if the preamp knob is turned all the way down, I think my pickups are just too hot, and I also record with an overdrive pedal in front of the interface so that might also be working against it


----------



## mattnedgus

will_m said:


> If you are referring to latency performance numbers I'd recommend checking out the extensive gear space thread on LLP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gearspace.com - View Single Post - Audio Interface - Low Latency Performance Data Base
> 
> 
> Post 15796206 -Forum for professional and amateur recording engineers to share techniques and advice.
> 
> 
> 
> gearspace.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I recall there is a small round trip latency difference (about 1ms) and a few percent improvement in plug-in instances before overload when using TB over USB3 (but on certain buffer sizes).


That's really interesting. A lot more than I imagined must come down to the interfaces hardware and driver design.

That said though, for the price of an RME interface with enough I/O and similar latency performance, I had a Presonus Quantum 2626 and updated my entire computer to a much faster newer processor and a motherboard with Thunderbolt, so I'm not at all unhappy :-D


----------



## kgdrum

fwiw I like having a pretty good interface in my case the RME UCX which has decent clean preamps but I also like having a Great River ME-1NV preamp which is a Neve type preamp & has a hi-z input. This Neve colored preamp imo sounds great on vocals,bass,guitars etc…….I like having both.


----------



## Pier

KEM said:


> It does but I keep it on line, I’ve tried switching to instrument and my signal clips even if the preamp knob is turned all the way down, I think my pickups are just too hot, and I also record with an overdrive pedal in front of the interface so that might also be working against it


Many pedals have a line output level, so that might be why.

Edit:

In any case, you're not using the mic preamp and you will not use it with an RME or UA interface. You're basically sending a line signal to the AD converter.


----------



## KEM

Pier said:


> Many pedals have a line output level, so that might be why.



So what you’re saying is I’m an idiot, I figured as much lol

This is the one I use:








PRECISION DRIVE


Never worry about fighting your tone or your gear again with the Precision Drive, the first modern overdrive made by guitar players for guitar players. The Precision Drive can take any set-up, both tube and digital, and turn it into the perfect modern metal rig with its precise tonal carving...



horizondevices.com


----------



## Pier

KEM said:


> So what you’re saying is I’m an idiot, I figured as much lol
> 
> This is the one I use:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRECISION DRIVE
> 
> 
> Never worry about fighting your tone or your gear again with the Precision Drive, the first modern overdrive made by guitar players for guitar players. The Precision Drive can take any set-up, both tube and digital, and turn it into the perfect modern metal rig with its precise tonal carving...
> 
> 
> 
> horizondevices.com


I can't find any specs of manual... maybe it does have a line level output.


----------



## KEM

Pier said:


> I can't find any specs of manual... maybe it does have a line level output.



Yeah I couldn’t find it either on the product page but if most overdrive pedals put out a line level signal it’d probably be safe to assume this does as well

But you said I’m just using the a/d converter for guitar so now I have to ask, what has the best a/d converters?


----------



## kgdrum

KEM said:


> Yeah I couldn’t find it either on the product page but if most overdrive pedals put out a line level signal it’d probably be safe to assume this does as well
> 
> But you said I’m just using the a/d converter for guitar so now I have to ask, what has the best a/d converters?


Best is at best a subjective opinion RME is very good as is the UAD. If you are planning to dive into UAD plug-ins and want to take advantage of the technology they have developed with their platform it’s a great platform but it’s pricey! RME has a different approach and some people might prefer the advantages of the TOTALMIX platform. Both are great which is better? in my opinion it just depends on plug-in priorities,your workflow,and budgetary capabilities.


----------



## Dewdman42

KEM said:


> All I record is my guitar, nothing else, I’m just looking to get the cleanest signal possible and my 7 year old Scarlett 2i2 isn’t cutting it, and I don’t want to spend more than $1,500



For electric guitar I highly highly recommend you check out the AXE I/O from IK.


----------



## Pier

KEM said:


> But you said I’m just using the a/d converter for guitar so now I have to ask, what has the best a/d converters?


Between RME and UA? Both are excellent.

But honestly, I think you'd be more than happy with an Audient ID4 mk2 or a MOTU M2.


----------



## KEM

Pier said:


> Between RME and UA? Both are excellent.
> 
> But honestly, I think you'd be more than happy with an Audient ID4 mk2 or a MOTU M2.



I’ll check em out, I want to get one that has an additional output as I’m at a point where I’ve been thinking about just recording my guitar direct into the interface with no pedals that way I have a clean DI to edit with, and then using the interface to reamp my guitars through the pedal and back into Cubase


----------



## SupremeFist

KEM said:


> I’ll check em out, I want to get one that has an additional output as I’m at a point where I’ve been thinking about just recording my guitar direct into the interface with no pedals that way I have a clean DI to edit with, and then using the interface to reamp my guitars through the pedal and back into Cubase


This is the way. 🤘🏻


----------



## KEM

SupremeFist said:


> This is the way. 🤘🏻



It definitely sounds like the best way to do it, and reamp boxes are cheap so it wouldn’t be a huge deal to buy one and add in that extra step. But that still begs the question, if I reamp my guitars through the overdrive pedal do I plug them into the line level input or do I plug them into the hi-z input? The Scarlett doesn’t even have a dedicated hi-z so I’ve never used one of those before and I’ve definitely never reamped before so I have no idea how to route that signal chain


----------



## SupremeFist

KEM said:


> It definitely sounds like the best way to do it, and reamp boxes are cheap so it wouldn’t be a huge deal to buy one and add in that extra step. But that still begs the question, if I reamp my guitars through the overdrive pedal do I plug them into the line level input or do I plug them into the hi-z input? The Scarlett doesn’t even have a dedicated hi-z so I’ve never used one of those before and I’ve definitely never reamped before so I have no idea how to route that signal chain


most pedals are instrument-level output (like the guitar itself) so will want to be plugged into the Hi-Z input if you have one. A cheap(ish) Line6 HX Stomp or similar will give you a lot of versatility here if you're interested in going down the modelling route.


----------



## KEM

SupremeFist said:


> most pedals are instrument-level output (like the guitar itself) so will want to be plugged into the Hi-Z input if you have one. A cheap(ish) Line6 HX Stomp or similar will give you a lot of versatility here if you're interested in going down the modelling route.



I use the Neural DSP stuff for my amp and cab, but I already have the Precision Drive and it sounds much better than the plugin pedals so I want to continue using it, I’ll just be reamping through the pedal instead of recording directly through it like I do now


----------



## SupremeFist

KEM said:


> I use the Neural DSP stuff for my amp and cab, but I already have the Precision Drive and it sounds much better than the plugin pedals so I want to continue using it, I’ll just be reamping through the pedal instead of recording directly through it like I do now


Gotcha. I mention the Line6 stuff because they are really great guitar-centric hardware interfaces if that's your main use (eg they have switchable input impedance, which you don't find on general-purpose interfaces).


----------



## KEM

SupremeFist said:


> Gotcha. I mention the Line6 stuff because they are really great guitar-centric hardware interfaces if that's your main use (eg they have switchable input impedance, which you don't find on general-purpose interfaces).



I’ll check those out as well!! On paper the Zen Q looks like the perfect interface for me but I just don’t know if I can trust an Antelope interface to actually work as intended given all the issues I’ve heard about them, but it sure has peaked my interest nonetheless


----------



## MusiquedeReve

KEM said:


> I’ll check those out as well!! On paper the Zen Q looks like the perfect interface for me but I just don’t know if I can trust an Antelope interface to actually work as intended given all the issues I’ve heard about them, but it sure has peaked my interest nonetheless


I have bought two AA interfaces in the past few years

The first was the Zen Tour desktop - I could not get it to work and returned it

The second was the Orion Synergy Core - it sounded great but seemed to produce a lower overall volume to my monitors - also, the routing matrix was beyond me - however, AA support was excellent and they got on the phone with me and I allowed them access to my computer and they routed everything for me -- still, the low volume issue annoyed me and I switched to the Apogee Symphony desktop

Now, I have rebuilt my guitar pedal board and have it set up using 2 tube amps and 2 Suhr reactive load boxes, which I wanted to use to reamp my DI guitar -- unfortunately, the Apogee Symphony desktop only has two outputs so, if I want to reamp, I will lose the ability to hear through my monitors (although, I suppose I could use headphones) which now has me searching for a new interface with multiple line outs

That brings me back full circle to the AA Zen Tour Synergy Core, which has built-in reamping outputs --- could the third time be the charm or should I try UA?


----------



## Paylight

MorphineNoir said:


> should I try UA?


Try RME UFX+


----------



## KEM

MorphineNoir said:


> I have bought two AA interfaces in the past few years
> 
> The first was the Zen Tour desktop - I could not get it to work and returned it
> 
> The second was the Orion Synergy Core - it sounded great but seemed to produce a lower overall volume to my monitors - also, the routing matrix was beyond me - however, AA support was excellent and they got on the phone with me and I allowed them access to my computer and they routed everything for me -- still, the low volume issue annoyed me and I switched to the Apogee Symphony desktop
> 
> Now, I have rebuilt my guitar pedal board and have it set up using 2 tube amps and 2 Suhr reactive load boxes, which I wanted to use to reamp my DI guitar -- unfortunately, the Apogee Symphony desktop only has two outputs so, if I want to reamp, I will lose the ability to hear through my monitors (although, I suppose I could use headphones) which now has me searching for a new interface with multiple line outs
> 
> That brings me back full circle to the AA Zen Tour Synergy Core, which has built-in reamping outputs --- could the third time be the charm or should I try UA?



That’s the million dollar question, isn’t it? On paper the Antelope stuff seems to be better than UAD in pretty much every way, but if the firmware and drivers sucks then all benefits are rendered useless

I suppose I should tell you to get the Zen, that way you can be my guinea pig to tell me if it works or not lol


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

Dewdman42 said:


> Gearspace.com - View Single Post - Audio Interface - Low Latency Performance Data Base
> 
> 
> Post 15796206 -Forum for professional and amateur recording engineers to share techniques and advice.
> 
> 
> 
> gearspace.com



What is that telling you? If you're tracking live then you're better off using direct monitoring, and if you're playing V.I.s then the latency from your MIDI controller dwarfs that.

And on what computer system? If you have to run a 512-sample buffer because your computer can't keep up, whether it's 1 or 11 doesn't matter.

Subtext: it's sort of silly that the marketing is all about latency, which is a minor issue, rather than SOUND QUALITY! It's not a great service to musicians that this has been allowed to happen. Time for the music tech journalism police to come to the rescue.


----------



## MusiquedeReve

Paylight said:


> Try RME UFX+


Going to look into them this evening after dinner



KEM said:


> That’s the million dollar question, isn’t it? On paper the Antelope stuff seems to be better than UAD in pretty much every way, but if the firmware and drivers sucks then all benefits are rendered useless
> 
> I suppose I should tell you to get the Zen, that way you can be my guinea pig to tell me if it works or not lol


Halvsies?


----------



## EvilDragon

will_m said:


> Well I'm glad my UFX+ has TB because if it didn't I'd have to use the USB3 connection which was a complete mess for me even on a supposedly supported chipset.


Actually something acted up with TB in mine after a certain blackout (I'm not sure if TB chip got fried in the UFX+, or the riser card on my mobo, or the TB cable itself...), so I had to move to USB3. The performance is still flawless (and I do also use MADI with Ferrofish A32 for additional I/O) and as low latency as ever.


----------



## Dewdman42

Nick Batzdorf said:


> What is that telling you? If you're tracking live then you're better off using direct monitoring, and if you're playing V.I.s then the latency from your MIDI controller dwarfs that.



pros and cons to everything, direct monitoring vs not. For me the greatest concern for latency is while playing in midi through VI's. There is no direct monitoring possible in that case. Most VI's do not have plugin latency. Assuming you're not trying to track through fancy effects, any latency you get while playing a V.I. is due to midi and audio card latency. If you want it to be tighter while you're playing it in, you find a lower latency hardware solution.

For recording vocals and most instruments, I feel like you, direct monitoring is what I prefer and use hardware FX temporarily while doing so, if at all...avoid using plugins for that process. But that is not always possible and in the case where you're going to track through the DAW mixer...then it can make a big difference, since when you start getting enough latency the vocalist can hear combing effects and such inside their inner ear from the headphone mix blending with their actual voice, etc..its annoying as hell....so really yea..its either direct monitoring, or I would say you need something under 5ms latency to use the DAW mixer while tracking vocals like that. Some other instruments would be more tolerant because not dealing with the inner ear.

PCI is still to this day the lowest latency you can achieve. period. USB will never be able to compete with that, notwithstanding the fact that RME has done an exemplary job of dropping it as low as possible and probably good enough for most people. Drivers of different USB devices vary wildy in quality. I'd had some USB devices that were intolerably stuck at around 10ms or higher as the best I could get and others that were slightly better. or with USB I was simply unable to use the smaller buffer settings with the USB drivers provided without destroying the CPU.

But my MOTU and Lynx PCI audio devices most definitely beat them all without breaking a sweat. Its possible that TB3/4 could come close to that, but I turn to the gearslutz thread in the future to see the comparison benchmarks and decide from there. The driver quality always has a lot to do with it.

The video above is mainly avoiding altogether the topic of latency and simply saying there is no point in going to USB3 from USB2 and that is totally true, unless you need a lot of channels at once, then maybe there would be a case for USB3. But otherwise, they are both going to get about the same latency as USB2; and greater compatibility across devices with the latter. That's why most manufacturers did not bother with USB3 for a lot of years, and apparently RME still will not bother with it and they are explaining why in that video. I do feel, however, that Thunderbolt solutions are very close to PCI performance in reality and have greater capability for both bandwidth and speed, then USB. There haven't been very many of them thus far, probably because of PC's.




Nick Batzdorf said:


> And on what computer system? If you have to run a 512-sample buffer because your computer can't keep up, whether it's 1 or 11 doesn't matter.



No doubt. but that is partly why you want to eliminate as much latency as possible WITHOUT having to lower the buffer as much to do it.

My own cheesegrater has struggled with every USB device I have ever owned to get less then 10ms of RTL.. However with the Lynx PCI card I have, I easily cut that in half. quality of drivers, quality of hardware....and because its on the PCI bus its getting prioritized compared to USB I feel. I was also getting closer in the 5-10ms range with my old trusty MOTU PCI-424 stuff, but its not compatible with Catalina+, so RIP....




Nick Batzdorf said:


> Subtext: it's sort of silly that the marketing is all about latency, which is a minor issue, rather than SOUND QUALITY! It's not a great service to musicians that this has been allowed to happen. Time for the music tech journalism police to come to the rescue.



Sound quality is of course the bottom line, but whether you have USB2, USB3, Thunderbolt, Firewire, PCI or some future tech...has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the sound quality. We're really talking about number of channels as one factor (bandwidth) and latency (speed). Though A/D converters are not all created equal either, so you may have to choose some particular sound card for its converters, despite the fact it has unsavory latency.


----------



## mscp

I really don't understand why some people are obsessed with extremely high-end AD converters since not many people (except some professionals or rich hobbyists) have outboard gear that take advantage of it, or have the ears to discern the difference. We used to do blind tests before and more than 80% of mixing engineers used to get things wrong ALL THE TIME...and they are good professionals.

A lot of people would do fine with Focusrite ones. I have an RME and I think it's overkill already, but I got it for the drivers.


----------



## Dewdman42

years ago, there was a wide disparity in converter quality across different devices, but that gap has narrowed substantially and I agree with you, this is not a concern for most of us now.


----------



## mscp

Dewdman42 said:


> years ago, there was a wide disparity in converter quality across different devices, but that gap has narrowed substantially and I agree with you, this is not a concern for most of us now.


Yeah...Before 2010ish. Any decently-priced AD/DA converter made in the last 2 decades will do for most of us. I remember back in 2002, I did not notice the difference between a Prism, an Aurora, RME, and Apogee when used with synths, and eventide H9000, and some other outboard.


----------



## Pier

mscp said:


> I really don't understand why some people are obsessed with extremely high-end AD converters since not many people (except some professionals or rich hobbyists) have outboard gear that take advantage of it, or have the ears to discern the difference. We used to do blind tests before and more than 80% of mixing engineers used to get things wrong ALL THE TIME...and they are good professionals.
> 
> A lot of people would do fine with Focusrite ones. I have an RME and I think it's overkill already, but I got it for the drivers.


I remember back in 2006 or so I went from a MOTU 828 to an RME FF 400 and the difference was really like night and day.

But these days, I totally agree with you. ADDA conversion has improved substantially in the past 10-15 years to the point even budget devices are good enough for most applications.

Nothing compares to the terrible converters in the old SoundBlaster 16 cards 😂 I mean, even 17 year old me could hear something wasn't right.


----------



## mscp

Pier said:


> I remember back in 2006 or so I went from a MOTU 828 to an RME FF 400 and the difference was really like night and day.
> 
> But these days, I totally agree with you. ADDA conversion has improved substantially in the past 10-15 years to the point even budget devices are good enough for most applications.
> 
> Nothing compares to the terrible converters in the old SoundBlaster 16 cards 😂 I mean, even 17 year old me could hear something wasn't right.


Well, MOTU 828 was super "muffled" back in early 2000's, but I still made good use of it. When I moved back to the U.K though, I forgot to switch it to 220V and blew the thing up. That was when I was introduced to the beautiful estate of RME. lol. Not sure how they are now but I bet it's much better. RME has always been clinical/clean and a good cost benefit (my first card was one of those HSDP or something like that).

SoundBlaster. haha. Blast from the past eh? That was my first consumer card.


----------



## Pier

mscp said:


> MOTU 828 was super "muffled" back in early 2000's


Yeah definitely. Of course I didn't know shit back then. I bought the MOTU because a friend had it and it looked professional 😂


----------



## Nimrod7

Custom USB Drivers are a point of failure when an OS update released.

Thunderbolt is a marvel of engineering, but yes probably an overkill for audio applications. Deep diving into the architecture of the protocol and seeing the potential of dynamically allocating multiple DisplayPort and PCIe streams, plus 100w charging & security (well, somehow), through a single cable is impressive. 

I am sad that the fees and the controllers are probably very expensive and the adoption is not that great (especially in the PC world).


----------



## KEM

Ok I just did a test and either something is wrong or I’m just an idiot  

I plugged my guitar directly into my Scarlett, switched the input to instrument, and even with the knob all the way down the signal was clipping, now switching the input over to line allows me to turn the knob up pretty far before it clips. If I’m understand this correctly shouldn’t it be the exact opposite?


----------



## mscp

KEM said:


> Ok I just did a test and either something is wrong or I’m just an idiot
> 
> I plugged my guitar directly into my Scarlett, switched the input to instrument, and even with the knob all the way down the signal was clipping, now switching the input over to line allows me to turn the knob up pretty far before it clips. If I’m understand this correctly shouldn’t it be the exact opposite?


Headroom: Line inputs can take up to +4dBu, while instrument inputs up to -10dBu. So, instrument inputs will sound louder and will distort faster depending on how hot the signal you're sending is.


----------



## KEM

mscp said:


> Headroom: Line inputs can take up to +4dBu, while instrument inputs up to -10dBu. So, instrument inputs will sound louder and will distort faster depending on how hot the signal you're sending is.



So what you’re saying is that my guitars output is extremely hot

This Scarlett sucks I can’t stand this thing, I need to upgrade


----------



## mscp

KEM said:


> So what you’re saying is that my guitars output is extremely hot
> 
> This Scarlett sucks I can’t stand this thing, I need to upgrade


I don't know what your situation is, which guitar you have, how much noise it produces, etc. But the headroom info is accurate. It's hard to troubleshoot your situation with the amount of data I read so far. though.

The scarlett is great. I have a 2i2 as a mobile I/O AI (backup) and it works wonders.


----------



## FireGS

KEM said:


> So what you’re saying is that my guitars output is extremely hot


Some info about the guitar would help. Active or passive pickups?


----------



## Pier

KEM said:


> So what you’re saying is that my guitars output is extremely hot


Do you have an active pickup by any chance?

I found this thread on a metal forum with more people having the same issue.









Scarlett 2i2 input too hot? line recording for guitars ok?


I'm using emg81 on my guitars and with my focusrite scarlett interface I get a clipping signal even with the gain turned all the way down. when...




www.ultimatemetal.com





Edit:

Found this on GS.



> The INST (Instrument) mode is primarily designed to be compatible with pick ups on acoustic instruments, it has a high gain and very high input impedance and so it is easily overloaded by humbuckers on an electric guitar, particularly with the guitar volume up close to max. It is fine to use Line mode for high output guitars, the gain is lower but the input impedance is still high enough not to load the guitar. If you still have an input too high you can use the PAD which will drop the level by 10dB.
> 
> The other option as you suggest is to use a DI box which has an input Pad and connect to the XLR but the combination of the line input and PAD options within Focusrite Control should give you a usable level in Logic.











HELP! Focusrite Scarlett clipping problems - Page 2 - Gearspace.com


Quote: Originally Posted by AdmiralQuality ➡️ Use the instrument in. The line level mode is low impedance and will sap tone. Use the volume knob on your guitar to further attenuate the input signal. Hi AdmiralQuality! Thanks for replying. Isn't that gonna make my guitar sound weaker? At least...



gearspace.com


----------



## KEM

mscp said:


> I don't know what your situation is, which guitar you have, how much noise it produces, etc. But the headroom info is accurate. It's hard to troubleshoot your situation with the amount of data I read so far. though.
> 
> The scarlett is great. I have a 2i2 as a mobile I/O AI (backup) and it works wonders.





FireGS said:


> Some info about the guitar would help. Active or passive pickups?





Pier said:


> Do you have an active pickup by any chance?
> 
> I found this thread on a metal forum with more people having the same issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scarlett 2i2 input too hot? line recording for guitars ok?
> 
> 
> I'm using emg81 on my guitars and with my focusrite scarlett interface I get a clipping signal even with the gain turned all the way down. when...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.ultimatemetal.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Found this on GS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HELP! Focusrite Scarlett clipping problems - Page 2 - Gearspace.com
> 
> 
> Quote: Originally Posted by AdmiralQuality ➡️ Use the instrument in. The line level mode is low impedance and will sap tone. Use the volume knob on your guitar to further attenuate the input signal. Hi AdmiralQuality! Thanks for replying. Isn't that gonna make my guitar sound weaker? At least...
> 
> 
> 
> gearspace.com



I’m using the Seymour Duncan Alpha/Omega pickups, which are high output and passive. I have the 1st gen Scarlett so it doesn’t have a pad button for the inputs


----------



## mscp

KEM said:


> I’m using the Seymour Duncan Alpha/Omega pickups, which are high output and passive. I have the 1st gen Scarlett so it doesn’t have a pad button for the inputs


then you need to upgrade, yes.


----------



## Pier

mscp said:


> then you need to upgrade, yes.


Or get a DI box.

But of course I will always sympathize with buying new gear (or plugins) 😂


----------



## KEM

mscp said:


> then you need to upgrade, yes.





Pier said:


> Or get a DI box.
> 
> But of course I will always sympathize with buying new gear (or plugins) 😂



I knew I was gonna have to buy more gear  

I’m going to my mixing engineers later today to test out my guitar on his Apollo and see if it runs into the same issue on that as well


----------



## MusiquedeReve

KEM said:


> So what you’re saying is that my guitars output is extremely hot
> 
> This Scarlett sucks I can’t stand this thing, I need to upgrade





FireGS said:


> Some info about the guitar would help. Active or passive pickups





KEM said:


> I knew I was gonna have to buy more gear
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’m going to my mixing engineers later today to test out my guitar on his Apollo and see if it runs into the same issue on that as well




Active pickups are tough going straight into an audio interface

Please keep us posted on your real world Apollo test


----------



## KEM

MorphineNoir said:


> Active pickups are very hard to record with directly into an interface - I have stopped trying



If I had some stock Fender pickups or something I’m sure I’d be fine, but the SD Alpha/Omega set is extremely hot, especially for passives


----------



## CATDAD

KEM said:


> I knew I was gonna have to buy more gear
> 
> I’m going to my mixing engineers later today to test out my guitar on his Apollo and see if it runs into the same issue on that as well


Just so you are aware, the issue you are having with it clipping at any level may be something specific to the Gen 1 2i2 itself! There were many others having the exact same problem with that unit. It was supposedly fixed with Gen 2 and Gen 3 units, and people who had the 2i4 or beyond could use the -10db pad to work around it. It seems unlikely that even an active pickup would be made so hot that it would easily clip a normal inst/hi-z input that was turned all the way down.

Though getting another more recent Scarlett unit could solve your clipping issue, I agree that a MOTU M2 or M4 would be even better, as its in a similar price/feature range and frankly performs better in nearly every single way.

Though if you plan to expand to an interface with a greater featureset, maybe just save for that instead and skip an intermediate solution.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

mscp said:


> I really don't understand why some people are obsessed with extremely high-end AD converters since not many people (except some professionals or rich hobbyists) have outboard gear that take advantage of it, or have the ears to discern the difference. We used to do blind tests before and more than 80% of mixing engineers used to get things wrong ALL THE TIME...and they are good professionals.
> 
> A lot of people would do fine with Focusrite ones. I have an RME and I think it's overkill already, but I got it for the drivers.



This is a well traveled argument. Blind tests are harder, and if you A-B things you can train yourself to hear the differences between any two things.

Good converters really do improve the sound quality, especially if you're using mics.

That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with budget audio interfaces, but the difference is not trivial.


----------



## mscp

Nick Batzdorf said:


> This is a well traveled argument. Blind tests are harder, and if you A-B things you can train yourself to hear the differences between any two things.
> 
> Good converters really do improve the sound quality, especially if you're using mics.
> 
> That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with budget audio interfaces, but the difference is not trivial.


But considering many composers don't have a dead room / booth to record vocals in, I wonder what the point of wasting 4-5k on it is.

If I were to track vocals, I would never do it in my writing studio (that's for sure) even though it's "dead" silent. I'd choose a facility with a dead room. Only then I'd be able to make proper use of a nice AD converter.


----------



## KEM

CATDAD said:


> Just so you are aware, the issue you are having with it clipping at any level may be something specific to the Gen 1 2i2 itself! There were many others having the exact same problem with that unit. It was supposedly fixed with Gen 2 and Gen 3 units, and people who had the 2i4 or beyond could use the -10db pad to work around it. It seems unlikely that even an active pickup would be made so hot that it would easily clip a normal inst/hi-z input that was turned all the way down.
> 
> Though getting another more recent Scarlett unit could solve your clipping issue, I agree that a MOTU M2 or M4 would be even better, as its in a similar price/feature range and frankly performs better in nearly every single way.
> 
> Though if you plan to expand to an interface with a greater featureset, maybe just save for that instead and skip an intermediate solution.



Just tried the Apollo, still clipping  

I guess a DI box is my only option


----------



## Pier

KEM said:


> Just tried the Apollo, still clipping
> 
> I guess a DI box is my only option


I mean, getting a DI is way cheaper than buying a $1,500 interface 😂


----------



## KEM

Pier said:


> I mean, getting a DI is way cheaper than buying a $1,500 interface 😂



Well yeah lol

I was going to get a new interface anyways but this is just another expense on top of that ughhhh


----------



## mscp

KEM said:


> Well yeah lol
> 
> I was going to get a new interface anyways but this is just another expense on top of that ughhhh


get one of those BOSS amplitude pedals and bob's your uncle.


----------



## MusiquedeReve

KEM said:


> Well yeah lol
> 
> I was going to get a new interface anyways but this is just another expense on top of that ughhhh


Wha are the leading contenders for your new interface?


----------



## KEM

mscp said:


> get one of those BOSS amplitude pedals and bob's your uncle.



My Precision Drive actually balances out the signal so I can record it through an instrumental signal but that then means I have to have it on when recording, which I’ve been doing and it’s worked fine, but I’d rather use it when reamping than tracking


----------



## KEM

MorphineNoir said:


> Wha are the leading contenders for your new interface?



Apollo Twin X, seems to be a really good option


----------



## rhizomusicosmos

KEM said:


> If I had some stock Fender pickups or something I’m sure I’d be fine, but the SD Alpha/Omega set is extremely hot, especially for passives


Someone else has had the same problem (unless you're Ovibos):


https://forums.prsguitars.com/threads/holcomb-output-pretty-hot.20028/


----------



## KEM

rhizomusicosmos said:


> Someone else has had the same problem (unless you're Ovibos):
> 
> 
> https://forums.prsguitars.com/threads/holcomb-output-pretty-hot.20028/



I figured as much, Misha Mansoor uses a DI box to track all of his guitars, so I guess that’s what I’ll be getting


----------



## rhizomusicosmos

KEM said:


> I figured as much, Misha Mansoor uses a DI box to track all of his guitars, so I guess that’s what I’ll be getting


Maybe get one with a pad switch . . .


----------



## KEM

rhizomusicosmos said:


> Maybe get one with a pad switch . . .



He uses the Radial J48, and considering Mark Holcomb is in his band I’m going to assume that’s the best option


----------



## CATDAD

@KEM I should also mention since you like things loud, from what I understand active pickups don't have as much change in their tone if you turn them down as passive ones do. If you have your pup cranked up, try turning it down until your signal isn't clipping your input if you can, then instead increase the input on your amp sim plugin and see if it sounds better than using your line-in.


----------



## MartinH.

KEM said:


> I plugged my guitar directly into my Scarlett, switched the input to instrument, and even with the knob all the way down the signal was clipping


I think that's a know issue with a certain generation of their interfaces that later was fixed. Look up the serial number and google to see which ones were affected. You probably have one of those.


----------



## MartinH.

CATDAD said:


> @KEM I should also mention since you like things loud, from what I understand active pickups don't have as much change in their tone if you turn them down as passive ones do. If you have your pup cranked up, try turning it down until your signal isn't clipping your input if you can, then instead increase the input on your amp sim plugin and see if it sounds better than using your line-in.



I think you shouldn't dial the guitar's volume down if you can still dial any other volume in the chain down for DI recording, because you'd worsen the signal to noise ratio needlessly. I have a focusrite scarlett solo interface and can record with both my emg808x pickup or lundgren pickup just fine without dialing the guitar down.

Edit: I see you basically mentioned all I said already before. Sorry, I didn't read the full thread.


----------



## CATDAD

MartinH. said:


> I think you shouldn't dial the guitar's volume down if you can still dial any other volume in the chain down for DI recording, because you'd worsen the signal to noise ratio needlessly. I have a focusrite scarlett solo interface and can record with both my emg808x pickup or lundgren pickup just fine without dialing the guitar down.


While this is true, it's worth trying to see if the tradeoff is worth it with his current equipment at the present moment!


----------



## KEM

We’ve been testing multiple guitars as well as doing more research on the subject and it looks like pickups meant for metal will commonly clip hi-z inputs even if they’re turned all the way down, looks like DI boxes are really the only solution for this scenario


----------



## KEM

MartinH. said:


> I think you shouldn't dial the guitar's volume down if you can still dial any other volume in the chain down for DI recording, because you'd worsen the signal to noise ratio needlessly. I have a focusrite scarlett solo interface and can record with both my emg808x pickup or lundgren pickup just fine without dialing the guitar down.
> 
> Edit: I see you basically mentioned all I said already before. Sorry, I didn't read the full thread.



My Lundgren’s also clip the hi-z input when it’s turned all the way down


----------



## MusiquedeReve

KEM said:


> We’ve been testing multiple guitars as well as doing more research on the subject and it looks like pickups meant for metal will commonly clip hi-z inputs even if they’re turned all the way down, looks like DI boxes are really the only solution for this scenario


The DI box I use (very much recommend it):









Countryman Type 10 1-channel Active Direct Box


Direct Box with 15dB and 30dB Pad




www.sweetwater.com


----------



## LATABOM

Pier said:


> It has nothing to do with being a pro or an amateur.
> 
> There are lot of pros that do everything in the box and don't need to record. So basically they just need good DA converters, good drivers, and maybe a good headphones amp.


Also, device longevity, zero downtime, usually flexibility and stability with external hardware comes into play for ITB professionals at some point, as well. And anyways, RME's DA, drivers and headphones amp are still a cut above the other brands I named, especially when it comes to drivers and conversion.

Edit: I'll also add class compliance, really robust MIDI and direct recording and/or live backups from the front of the interface without a PC connected as pluses for the professional that a hobbyist probably wouldn't consider important, even if you're ITB.


----------



## LATABOM

KEM said:


> How does RME’s signal path (preamps, converters) compare to UAD’s?


Lower noise, (slightly) more gain, much lower latency. And RME is head and shoulders above every other company when it comes to support, stability and drivers. You will never get a message saying "wait to update your operating system", because they are incredibly fast at updating drivers. And again, my 2004 Fireface 800 is still supported with drivers, spare parts, etc in 2022. I know a studio that still has a working Hammerfall that's a few years older even.


----------



## will_m

mattnedgus said:


> That's really interesting. A lot more than I imagined must come down to the interfaces hardware and driver design.
> 
> That said though, for the price of an RME interface with enough I/O and similar latency performance, I had a Presonus Quantum 2626 and updated my entire computer to a much faster newer processor and a motherboard with Thunderbolt, so I'm not at all unhappy :-D


Yeah I think we are all chasing the same thing, ability to use more vsts at lower latencies. How you achieve that will either be through computing power or the audio interface or both.



EvilDragon said:


> Actually something acted up with TB in mine after a certain blackout (I'm not sure if TB chip got fried in the UFX+, or the riser card on my mobo, or the TB cable itself...), so I had to move to USB3. The performance is still flawless (and I do also use MADI with Ferrofish A32 for additional I/O) and as low latency as ever.


I had some issues with the TB as well but was able to resolve them, nice to have connection options though. I found the TB performs slightly better in terms of latency than USB3 (when working) which is impressive.


----------



## ckeddf

Was it on Gearspace or KVR where somebody posted a blind A/B test between UA and RME preamps a couple of years ago? Quite a few people picked and preferred what they thought were the UA files. It turned out it was the RME interface. I remember the test was kind of flawed, as those things usually go. But I think UA marketing plays a big role in how their interfaces and "sound" are perceived. Can't go wrong with either, in my opinion.


----------



## mscp

ckeddf said:


> Was it on Gearspace or KVR where somebody posted a blind A/B test between UA and RME preamps a couple of years ago? Quite a few people picked and preferred what they thought were the UA files. It turned out it was the RME interface. I remember the test was kind of flawed, as those things usually go. But I think UA marketing plays a big role in how their interfaces and "sound" are perceived. Can't go wrong with either, in my opinion.


It's a coin flip. Most people will mentally "flip a coin" and tell you what they prefer in an A/B test mostly because they will listen in a less than "perfect" environment. Unless you're recording vocals in a dead room with some pristine Neumann mics that will then become an acapella track for an album, or some orchestral ensemble in a gorgeous room, there's absolutely *NO NEED* to choose one over the other if not for their drivers behaviour in your OS of choice in I/O. So, unless you have a large studio with a great live room to record orchestral ensembles, it is absolutely pointless to spend big bucks with AD conversion.

Food for thought: How many people in this world have audiophile gear to perceive the 5% difference in orchestral hi-res albums? I can only think of elderly classical music enthusiasts, lol.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

mscp said:


> It's a coin flip. Most people will mentally "flip a coin" and tell you what they prefer in an A/B test mostly because they will listen in a less than "perfect" environment. Unless you're recording vocals in a dead room with some pristine Neumann mics that will then become an acapella track for an album, or some orchestral ensemble in a gorgeous room, there's absolutely *NO NEED* to choose one over the other if not for their drivers behaviour in your OS of choice in I/O. So, unless you have a large studio with a great live room to record orchestral ensembles, it is absolutely pointless to spend big bucks with AD conversion.
> 
> Food for thought: How many people in this world have audiophile gear to perceive the 5% difference in orchestral hi-res albums? I can only think of elderly classical music enthusiasts, lol.



Audio nihilism, eh?


----------



## mattnedgus

ckeddf said:


> Was it on Gearspace or KVR where somebody posted a blind A/B test between UA and RME preamps a couple of years ago? Quite a few people picked and preferred what they thought were the UA files. It turned out it was the RME interface. I remember the test was kind of flawed, as those things usually go. But I think UA marketing plays a big role in how their interfaces and "sound" are perceived. Can't go wrong with either, in my opinion.


Yeah definitely, there's a lot to be said for just how much the way in which we perceive a product influences how we hear it.

I nearly threw down a tonne of money on a Mac after being convinced I could hear a difference between an Air and PC through the same interface - I drove myself to distraction switching between them, still convinced each time. It was only when I did a qualitative* test with Room EQ Wizard I realised it had to be all in my head and that 'perceived' benefit evaporated.

*EDIT: sorry I meant "quantitative" (measured 😆)!


----------



## KEM

mattnedgus said:


> Yeah definitely, there's a lot to be said for just how much the way in which we perceive a product influences how we hear it.
> 
> I nearly threw done a tonne of money on a Mac after being convinced I could hear a difference between an Air and PC through the same interface - I drove myself to distraction switching between them, still convinced each time. It was only when I did a qualitative test with Room EQ Wizard I realised it had to be all in my head and that 'perceived' benefit evaporated.



You should’ve gotten the Mac anyways though


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

Any musician who can't hear the difference between mic preamps - even between very good high-end ones, not just $5 ones built into audio interfaces - really needs to do some audio eartraining to improve their listening skills.

I'm quite serious!

Now, that doesn't mean everyone would notice if, say, you switched mic preamps on the lead vocal in the middle of a song. But try recording anything with some complex overtones (acoustic guitar, piano, etc.) through two different mic preamps. It's safe to say that you won't be posting smack about "double-blind test or you didn't hear it."


----------



## CATDAD

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Any musician who can't hear the difference between mic preamps - even between very good high-end ones, not just $5 ones built into audio interfaces - really needs to do some audio eartraining to improve their listening skills.
> 
> I'm quite serious!
> 
> Now, that doesn't mean everyone would notice if, say, you switched mic preamps on the lead vocal in the middle of a song. But try recording anything with some complex overtones (acoustic guitar, piano, etc.) through two different mic preamps. It's safe to say that you won't be posting smack about "double-blind test or you didn't hear it."


This is fair enough, but on the other hand the qualitative differences are often merely differences, and not necessarily a case of one being objectively better than the other! (Unless you are comparing something measurable like noise or range, of course!)

But yeah, If you can hear the difference between guitar pups, you can hear the difference between preamps!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

CATDAD said:


> This is fair enough, but on the other hand the qualitative differences are often merely differences, and not necessarily a case of one being objectively better than the other! (Unless you are comparing something measurable like noise or range, of course!)
> 
> But yeah, If you can hear the difference between guitar pups, you can hear the difference between preamps!



More often than not the differences are 100% one being better than the other. There's a very good reason, say, Millennia Media is in business!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

Now, my Millennia Media channel strip has both tube and solid-state paths (you select one), and in that case they just sound different from one another. Same with the choice of tubes you put in - they all sound different and one isn't necessarily better than the other. It also has a transformer you can switch in and out just for color.

But you can also hear the difference between a $2000 audio interface's mic preamps and the ones on a $200 one - and you really don't need ideal mics and a perfect recording space for it to be obvious that one sounds better. (Same with D/As in my experience.)

There's nothing wrong with inexpensive gear, of course. But if you're recording live instruments in a project studio, it makes sense to have a good recording chain. And if you're mixing, a good monitoring chain.

Another rant (one of my favorite ones): people talk about double-blind listening tests, saying that if you don't hear something on them then you're wasting your money. I disagree. Double-blind tests are more difficult than being able to hear when you know what you're listening to. They're very useful for that reason.

Still, it's not cheating to switch back and forth knowing what you're listening to. That's how you train your ears, for one. Making it easier to hear something is the ultimate goal anyway!

What's more, differences in sound quality can sometimes become much more noticeable over long periods of time, like weeks of day in and out listening.

Why am I not still talking about Thunderbolt? Do I not realize how far off-topic I am? What's wrong with me?


----------



## gordinho

A proper reamp box will feed pedals high z and typically output at mic level which will benefit from color from a compressor and preamp.


----------



## FireGS

Nick Batzdorf said:


> But you can also hear the difference between a $2000 audio interface's mic preamps and the ones on a $200 one - and you really don't need ideal mics and a perfect recording space for it to be obvious that one sounds better. (Same with D/As in my experience.)





Nick Batzdorf said:


> What's more, differences in sound quality can sometimes become much more noticeable over long periods of time, like weeks of day in and out listening.


There's also the cumulative effect of either recording/tracking and/or mixing with less expensive gear. The intricacies (or lack of them) of the converters will probably show themselves when stacked on top of themselves. Unless, like, that sound is your thing, man.


----------



## MusiquedeReve

gordinho said:


> A proper reamp box will feed pedals high z and typically output at mic level which will benefit from color from a compressor and preamp.


So a line out from an audio interface should not be used in place of a reamp box?


----------



## mscp

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Any musician who can't hear the difference between mic preamps - even between very good high-end ones, not just $5 ones built into audio interfaces - really needs to do some audio eartraining to improve their listening skills.
> 
> I'm quite serious!
> 
> Now, that doesn't mean everyone would notice if, say, you switched mic preamps on the lead vocal in the middle of a song. But try recording anything with some complex overtones (acoustic guitar, piano, etc.) through two different mic preamps. It's safe to say that you won't be posting smack about "double-blind test or you didn't hear it."


Like we talked in the chat, $200 is not even cheap to me..it's "broke ass". haha. Cheap in professional terms for ADDA conversion starts with a $800ish price tag for 2 line inputs and MAYBE 1 8x8 ADAT I/O...maybe. Anything in the 2-3 grand is good enough for most people (hobbyists and professionals) in a less than perfect environment. Whoever tells me he/she can discern the difference in quality between an UA/RME and Prism/Antelope AD converter with their home/small studios running Genelecs/Yamaha's near fields at 96khz-192khz configs are massive BSers...They cannot, but to prove their worth, they will say they can. Yeah..no. And pulling that kind of move in big studios would be a bit embarrassing like I've seen some 'cats' pretending they could hear the difference in front of veteran engineers. lol.

S...I've even seen one particularly famous award-winning engineer not telling an analog SSL 4000G+ and Pro Tools HDX mix apart (without processing) back in early 2000's...haha. It clearly didn't stop him from working on his job successfully. hehe.

Now, in terms of whether RME needing thunderbolt or not, the answer is absolutely not. Every machine from early 2000s to present have USB-A 3.0 which is perfectly fine, but not every machine (in fact just a few) have thunderbolt. Either thunderbolt becomes a REAL standard to justify the move to TB or I applaud RME for thinking horizontally. haha.


----------



## MusiquedeReve

I just ordered this (will be selling my Focusrite 18i20 and Apogee Symphony Desktop)

https://en.antelopeaudio.com/zen-q-synergy-core-launch-deal/?campaignid=11063970129&adgroupid=109854408218&adid=580501960764&gclid=Cj0KCQjw_4-SBhCgARIsAAlegrVP1e9mPH3f2QPs_farvromBbwqNUlc9T-8yos_ZXyRLLP7Wf1I6KMaAmmeEALw_wcB


----------



## gordinho

MorphineNoir said:


> So a line out from an audio interface should not be used in place of a reamp box?


It will be sub optimal and not even work depending on the pedals. Also unless the pedal outputs are line level you will need a hi z input in your soundcard.

Some pedals nowadays have i/o at line level but that is not the majority. If you want to use any pedal out there you need a proper reamp box


----------



## AudioLoco

LATABOM said:


> UA (never forget Powercore);


Yes.... all those pieces of plastic and metal and those Sharc processors are officially useless now that they are porting all to native... It was really easy to predict for anyone with a Powercore experience...


----------



## KEM

Might just get a Zen Go and be done with it (but I’ll still probably need a di box since all my guitars have very high output pickups)

I would get the Zen Q but my mixing engineer just ordered the Discrete 8 Pro so he’ll be able to reamp for me, so no need to spend the money on extra outputs


----------



## MusiquedeReve

KEM said:


> Might just get a Zen Go and be done with it (but I’ll still probably need a di box since all my guitars have very high output pickups)
> 
> I would get the Zen Q but my mixing engineer just ordered the Discrete 8 Pro so he’ll be able to reamp for me, so no need to spend the money on extra outputs


My Zen Q should be here this coming week -- I do not believe the Zen Q has the re-amp outs on it - I think those are only on the Zen Tour


----------



## KEM

MorphineNoir said:


> My Zen Q should be here this coming week -- I do not believe the Zen Q has the re-amp outs on it - I think those are only on the Zen Tour



No it doesn’t but you can use the additional outputs to reamp if you have a reamp box, the Zen Go only has outputs for stereo monitors, obviously you can still do it if you want to unplug a monitor but that’s just annoying and not worth the time or effort, so I’ll use the Zen Go to record and then go to my mixing engineers to reamp with the Discrete 8 Pro


----------



## MusiquedeReve

KEM said:


> No it doesn’t but you can use the additional outputs to reamp if you have a reamp box, the Zen Go only has outputs for stereo monitors, obviously you can still do it if you want to unplug a monitor but that’s just annoying and not worth the time or effort, so I’ll use the Zen Go to record and then go to my mixing engineers to reamp with the Discrete 8 Pro


Ahhh that's true

My plan is to record through my DI box into the Zen Q while simultaneously recording through my stereo amp setup by changing the Hi-Z inputs on the front of the Zen Q to Line

This way I always have a guitar DI track as a backup to run through my NeuralDSP plugins (Tim Henson and Nolly)


----------



## KEM

MorphineNoir said:


> Ahhh that's true
> 
> My plan is to record through my DI box into the Zen Q while simultaneously recording through my stereo amp setup by changing the Hi-Z inputs on the front of the Zen Q to Line
> 
> This way I always have a guitar DI track as a backup to run through my NeuralDSP plugins (Tim Henson and Nolly)



That’s the smart way to do it for sure, I only use amp sims but I also use a real Precision Drive, right now I just record through the Precision Drive but I’d like to record a clean di and then reamp through the Precision Drive later and have that go back into my amp sims

It’s annoying to have an extra step in there but it’ll make my life easier in the long term, if my engineer didn’t get the Discrete 8 Pro I would’ve gone with the Zen Q for sure but the Zen Go is now a better value for me since I wouldn’t need the entire outputs


----------

