# I think I like my Focusrite 2i2 better than my Audient id4, what's up with that?



## Lea1229 (Jun 20, 2020)

First off, I use a PC with Windows 10. 

I did a lot of research, some of it in these forums, to determine that the best I could do in my price range (unemployed, so low, lol) was the Audient id4- this is for working with vi instruments/orchestra samples. Generally, I saw recommendations for anything RME as a first choice, and Audient as the next best, with a lot of complaints about the focusrites. Well, after getting frustrated with having to un- then re-install the Audient software as it stopped working every 2-6 weeks, I decided to go back and compare it to the focusrite 2i2 gen3 I have. I think I like the sound from the focusrite slightly better, but that seems to go against the collective wisdom. Could it be the gen3 is better now? 

My comparison is of playback of orchestra samples. I did not do a side by side recording comparison, but I will if anyone's interested. Perhaps it's in recording that it is superior. Thoughts?


----------



## shomynik (Jun 20, 2020)

Its rly hard to compare sound with so much fiddling between A/B listening. m
As they are both USB, you might wanna install them on separate machines and then just switch speakers... much faster I believe.

Otherwise, focusrite makes rly nice products, so Im not suprised about your observation. Although, when I was starting out, I was always opting for used interfaces (RME) and speakers, that way its possible to reach some nice sound quality and those device last rly long so no worry there.


----------



## Lea1229 (Jun 20, 2020)

shomynik said:


> Its rly hard to compare sound with so much fiddling between A/B listening. m
> As they are both USB, you might wanna install them on separate machines and then just switch speakers... much faster I believe.
> 
> Otherwise, focusrite makes rly nice products, so Im not suprised about your observation. Although, when I was starting out, I was always opting for used interfaces (RME) and speakers, that way its possible to reach some nice sound quality and those device last rly long so no worry there.



It's true comparison is a bit hard with the delay between listenings, if I did it quicker I might be able to pinpoint what the difference is. I just thought I'd share my impressions since it seems to be an ongoing question. 

I'll keep the better used gear in mind for whenever I upgrade. After getting these two interfaces, I've been focusing on sound treatment in my listening space and building a lot of absorption and a few dispersion panels. Still need to treat the ceiling and probably a little more bass control. I found a frequency response chart of my speakers, and did some basic eq to try to flatten a few of the more obvious bumps, and I felt that helped as well.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jun 20, 2020)

I picked up an RME Babyface last Christmas when it was on sale. I always heard great things about it and it was on my wishlist. Truthfully, I can't tell the difference between it and my 6i6. I haven't yet recorded vocals with it. The main reason people love it is the latency is so much less. But really? If you aren't recording audio, it doesn't really matter much.


----------



## Gerbil (Jun 20, 2020)

dzilizzi said:


> I picked up an RME Babyface last Christmas when it was on sale. I always heard great things about it and it was on my wishlist. Truthfully, I can't tell the difference between it and my 6i6. I haven't yet recorded vocals with it. The main reason people love it is the latency is so much less. But really? If you aren't recording audio, it doesn't really matter much.


I bought a Yamaha AG06 a month back for teaching from home while college is closed and can't tell the difference between that and the RME multiface II I still use on my old DAW.


----------



## MartinH. (Jun 21, 2020)

Gerbil said:


> I bought a Yamaha AG06 a month back for teaching from home while college is closed and can't tell the difference between that and the RME multiface II I still use on my old DAW.


I just looked at it on Thomann, and I have a question. Can you just plug in and record with a regular gaming Headset with this one? Having my headset plugged both into my Focusrite Scarlet Solo for listening and into my internal PC soundcard for voip is a bit of a hassle. Also it would be cool to be able to leave the gaming headset connected in the 3.5 mm jacks, a better headset for critical mixing tasks in the quarter inch headphone monitor jacks (I hope those don't just output the recording signals?) and the speakers connected to the main output. That would finally allow me to use both headsets without the annyoing re-plugging, or use one headset with a longer cable further away from the computer for gaming on a bigger screen.


----------



## Gerbil (Jun 21, 2020)

There's a minijack aux in next to the minijack headphone output which is designed with gaming headsets in mind, I guess. But both route the signal away from the XLR input and the quarter inch headphone output respectively. You can't use both headphone sockets simultaneously and all outputs output the same signal. It's a pretty simple device.




MartinH. said:


> I just looked at it on Thomann, and I have a question. Can you just plug in and record with a regular gaming Headset with this one? Having my headset plugged both into my Focusrite Scarlet Solo for listening and into my internal PC soundcard for voip is a bit of a hassle. Also it would be cool to be able to leave the gaming headset connected in the 3.5 mm jacks, a better headset for critical mixing tasks in the quarter inch headphone monitor jacks (I hope those don't just output the recording signals?) and the speakers connected to the main output. That would finally allow me to use both headsets without the annyoing re-plugging, or use one headset with a longer cable further away from the computer for gaming on a bigger screen.


----------



## MartinH. (Jun 21, 2020)

Gerbil said:


> There's a minijack aux in next to the minijack headphone output which is designed with gaming headsets in mind, I guess. But both route the signal away from the XLR input and the quarter inch headphone output respectively. You can't use both headphone sockets simultaneously and all outputs output the same signal. It's a pretty simple device.



Ah, I see. That's a pity but thanks a lot for the info! Then I'll stick with my Focusrite for a while longer.


----------



## sumskilz (Jun 21, 2020)

The intermodulation distortion is fair bit lower in the Scarlet mkIIIs than it is in the Audient iD4, so I'd expect it to sound better, considering that IMD is dissonant distortion. Although it's low enough in both for the difference to be subtle, like less clarity in the iD4. All types of noise taken together are actually 20 dB higher in the iD4 than in the Scarlet, but still -75 dB below your signal on average. For most, I think the difference would still be noticeable in a back to back test, even if it were blind.


----------



## Lea1229 (Jun 21, 2020)

dzilizzi said:


> I picked up an RME Babyface last Christmas when it was on sale. I always heard great things about it and it was on my wishlist. Truthfully, I can't tell the difference between it and my 6i6. I haven't yet recorded vocals with it. The main reason people love it is the latency is so much less. But really? If you aren't recording audio, it doesn't really matter much.


Interesting, so I'm not the only one  I got the audient because I read that it could handle a greater number of vst instruments/samples at once. However I think my computer is the limiting factor right now.


----------



## Lea1229 (Jun 21, 2020)

sumskilz said:


> The intermodulation distortion is fair bit lower in the Scarlet mkIIIs than it is in the Audient iD4, so I'd expect it to sound better, considering that IMD is dissonant distortion. Although it's low enough in both for the difference to be subtle, like less clarity in the iD4. All types of noise taken together are actually 20 dB higher in the iD4 than in the Scarlet, but still -75 dB below your signal on average. For most, I think the difference would still be noticeable in a back to back test, even if it were blind.



I'm a littlle confused, isn't the Scarlett mkIII a microphone & not an interface? or is that shorthand for 3rd generation... Is it just that this new generation of scarlett has lower IMD, or has the ID4 always had a little more distortion (do all Audients have a little more distortion than focusrite)? Also, where does one look to see those values (IMD) when researching an interface? Sorry for all the questions, I am glad there seems to be some evidence that backs up my impression.


----------



## rhizomusicosmos (Jun 21, 2020)

Scarlett 2i2 Gen 3 measurements for DAC, ADC and headphone amp:








Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 Audio Interface Gen 3 Review


This is a review and detailed measurements of the Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 Audio Interface (DAC/ADC). I was talked into buying it recently. The 2i2 costs US $140 including free Prime shipping so very reasonable for amount of functionality. For a budge device, the Scarlett 2i2 looks pretty good...




www.audiosciencereview.com





Audient iD4:








Audient iD4 Audio Interface Review


This is a review and detailed measurements of the Audient iD4 Audio Interface (USB DAC and ADC) plus headphone output. It was kindly sent to me by a member. The iD4 costs US $199 including Prime shipping. The build quality is quite solid: The shell is close to what Schiit uses but thicker...




www.audiosciencereview.com


----------



## dcoscina (Jun 21, 2020)

I can tell the difference between my MOtU M2 and Apollo Twin Duo. The UA is so much more detailed.


----------



## bill5 (Jun 21, 2020)

Lea1229 said:


> First off, I use a PC with Windows 10.
> 
> I did a lot of research, some of it in these forums, to determine that the best I could do in my price range (unemployed, so low, lol) was the Audient id4- this is for working with vi instruments/orchestra samples. Generally, I saw recommendations for anything RME as a first choice, and Audient as the next best, with a lot of complaints about the focusrites. Well, after getting frustrated with having to un- then re-install the Audient software as it stopped working every 2-6 weeks, I decided to go back and compare it to the focusrite 2i2 gen3 I have. I think I like the sound from the focusrite slightly better, but that seems to go against the collective wisdom. Could it be the gen3 is better now?


No, it's just that "collective wisdom" is a bit of an oxymoron. Audients cost more, so people assume and swear they're better. It's a myth, a joke, the great audio scam. That's nothing against Audients per se, just saying that you don't always get what you pay for to put it mildly! 

As for Focusrites, I've seen/heard few complaints from 2d gen on out; it was the 1st gen that were buggy. They make excellent units.


----------



## bill5 (Jun 21, 2020)

Lea1229 said:


> Interesting, so I'm not the only one  I got the audient because I read that it could handle a greater number of vst instruments/samples at once.


That doesn't even make sense. Where on Earth did you read that?


----------



## Lea1229 (Jun 21, 2020)

bill5 said:


> That doesn't even make sense. Where on Earth did you read that?


At this point I'm not going to go digging around to find it. Point taken.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jun 21, 2020)

I think the Apollo is the only one that adds something extra in that it has built in effects, if I remember correctly. I almost got one, but they didn't have any Windows versions when I was looking. So I got the RME.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Jun 21, 2020)

With a gen 2 or 3 and the latest drivers.... not too many complaints about Focusrite. They don’t have the lowest latency, but it’s ok. They’re good interfaces.

I did get a BSOD with my 6i6gen2 when I powered off the interface with the power switch a few months ago. Changing the latency buffer used to sometimes BSOD as well in Win 10, but not for awhile now. They seem to have “settled in”.


----------



## sostenuto (Jun 21, 2020)

dzilizzi said:


> I think the Apollo is the only one that adds something extra in that it has built in effects, if I remember correctly. I almost got one, but they didn't have any Windows versions when I was looking. So I got the RME.



So cool to see such an objective and honest reply on this topic !! Fairly confident with Focusrite across the board, but especially Gen 3.
DAW #1 has (2) Saffire Pro14(s), and truly doubt I could 'hear/perceive' notable difference on older Senn Fones. 

Returned 'refurb' SOLO, but nothing abhorrent .... just need to 'trial' Clarett 4Pre USB based on additional capabilities. Confident RME Babyface Pro LS are solid choice ..... but $900. is NOT .... cuz I likely could not hear notable improvements either.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jun 21, 2020)

sostenuto said:


> So cool to see such an objective and honest reply on this topic !! Fairly confident with Focusrite across the board, but especially Gen 3.
> DAW #1 has (2) Saffire Pro14(s), and truly doubt I could 'hear/perceive' notable difference on older Senn Fones.
> 
> Returned 'refurb' SOLO, but nothing abhorrent .... just need to 'trial' Clarett 4Pre USB based on additional capabilities. Confident RME Babyface Pro LS are solid choice ..... but $900. is NOT .... cuz I likely could not hear notable improvements either.


Really, it is only good because it has low latency. There are times I notice the latency, usually when I'm trying to find a problem with the audio, following onscreen trying to match sound with the wave. But I am good at shapes, if this makes sense. And can mostly track down visually once I have an area to look. I also have to use direct monitoring with the Focusrite when recording. Not really a problem because it is just me and not a band. 

But general listening? I don't think my ears are that good anymore.


----------



## sumskilz (Jun 21, 2020)

Lea1229 said:


> I'm a littlle confused, isn't the Scarlett mkIII a microphone & not an interface? or is that shorthand for 3rd generation... Is it just that this new generation of scarlett has lower IMD, or has the ID4 always had a little more distortion (do all Audients have a little more distortion than focusrite)? Also, where does one look to see those values (IMD) when researching an interface? Sorry for all the questions, I am glad there seems to be some evidence that backs up my impression.


I was referring the 3rd generation Scarlet. Manufacturers don't like to list IMD specs, presumably because they are never as low as THD specs, and so expose their products as less transparent than one would assume looking at the THD specs, but that's misleading, especially because it's IMD that is actually dissonant whereas people often find low level harmonic distortion pleasing. 

Scarlets of a particular generation spec very closely across the series, but you can't always generalize by brand. Audient's iD22 specs much better than their iD4, so the difference isn't just in the feature set. People at Gearslutz are enthusiastic about the Audient interfaces because they function more like analog gear. I think that enthusiasm explains some of Audient's exaggerated reputation.

Here are some RMAA measurements to add to the great links rhizomusicosmos already posted (some UA thrown in to for further comparison):














IMD is more audible at higher frequencies (up to where one's hearing drops off), so IMD at 10 kHz is a particularly significant measure. Lower is better.


----------



## bill5 (Jun 22, 2020)

Lea1229 said:


> At this point I'm not going to go digging around to find it. Point taken.



Regret if that came out wrong; certainly wasn't criticizing you. I was genuinely curious about the source, but no big.


----------



## osterdamus (Jul 6, 2021)

Gerbil said:


> I bought a Yamaha AG06 a month back for teaching from home while college is closed and can't tell the difference between that and the RME multiface II I still use on my old DAW.


Are you on Windows or Mac? If the latter, have you tried it with Big Sur? Thanks 🙏🏻


----------



## Gerbil (Jul 6, 2021)

osterdamus said:


> Are you on Windows or Mac? If the latter, have you tried it with Big Sur? Thanks 🙏🏻


PC so can't help there, I'm afraid.


----------



## Jimmy Hellfire (Jul 6, 2021)

I think one should not even begin to bother themselves with audio mythology and technobabble.


----------



## easyrider (Jul 6, 2021)

Both are low end devices so the DACs will be pretty similar considering the price point.

Audient use their console pres in all their devices so the Audient pre might have the edge depending on taste.


----------



## bill5 (Jul 7, 2021)

Jimmy Hellfire said:


> I think one should not even begin to bother themselves with audio mythology and technobabble.


Right. Stuff is so good now that most stats are pointless or close to it.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Jul 9, 2021)

bill5 said:


> Right. Stuff is so good now that most stats are pointless or close to it.


Rough guidelines is all there is, and a lot has to do with features, such as I/O, vs sound. One could roughly divide it up into:
* under $100
* $100 to $500
* $500 to $1000
* $1000 up to more than I would know about … and probably a category above that


----------



## mscp (Jul 9, 2021)

Gerbil said:


> I bought a Yamaha AG06 a month back for teaching from home while college is closed and can't tell the difference between that and the RME multiface II I still use on my old DAW.


You won't hear a difference if your room is not properly treated, and your system isn't calibrated. 

The difference comes in the quality of the AD/DA converters. If you're not recording audio, and/or have subpar monitors in a untreated room, then, it's fair to say it's pointless to spend money on higher-end audio interfaces.

But these days, anything above the 300USD mark is decent, and will do the job ok. So no worries.


----------



## CATDAD (Jul 9, 2021)

Using more expensive parts doesn't always make a *noticeably* better product. Might be better on paper, or might be less obvious like the device might be more likely to last 20 years instead of 10. Might perform better in supersonic frequencies in a way that doesn't matter whatsoever. Or maybe most of the item's cost is in the preamps, and if you don't do much recording that "upgrade" is completely lost. I think that last point is the most common reason for an interface to be much more expensive. It may just be that you are paying for improvements that aren't important for your use-case. The 2i2 doesn't have MIDI ports, SPDIF, multiple outs, loopback functionality, extra inputs beyond the 2 basic preamps, monitoring, or any such extra feature. If you have no need for these features they're wasted cost too.


One item can be more expensive to build (thus command a higher market price) while still being not as good or showing improvements in niche places that are insignificant to what you plan to use it for, or are more "nice-to-haves". Most of the flak the 2i2 gets seems to be from gen1 that had driver issues and had trouble with hot DI signals. That reputation has really seemed to stick in peoples' minds. Windows drivers have shown huge improvement over the last decade. Gen3 seems to just really round off the unit in a way that does a decent job at everything you'd expect to use it for and nothing more or less.


----------



## Gerbil (Jul 9, 2021)

Phil81 said:


> You won't hear a difference if your room is not properly treated, and your system isn't calibrated.
> 
> The difference comes in the quality of the AD/DA converters. If you're not recording audio, and/or have subpar monitors in a untreated room, then, it's fair to say it's pointless to spend money on higher-end audio interfaces.
> 
> But these days, anything above the 300USD mark is decent, and will do the job ok. So no worries.


The room is properly treated and everything set up as it should be. I still can't hear the difference. It's not like listening to those old soundblaster cards where there were clearly differences in the stereo field. They both sound pretty identical. The bigger factor may be that I'm nearing 50 and I doubt my hearing is as good as it once was.


----------



## bill5 (Jul 9, 2021)

Phil81 said:


> But these days, anything above the 300USD mark is decent, and will do the job ok. So no worries.


Anything below the $300 mark, never mind at and/or above it, is more than decent, it's quite good. Very generally speaking, it gets better as you go up, but as stated earlier, it becomes more a question of features, not quality.


----------



## bill5 (Jul 9, 2021)

Gerbil said:


> The room is properly treated and everything set up as it should be. I still can't hear the difference. It's not like listening to those old soundblaster cards where there were clearly differences in the stereo field. They both sound pretty identical. The bigger factor may be that I'm nearing 50 and I doubt my hearing is as good as it once was.


Or there just really isn't much difference.


----------



## mscp (Jul 10, 2021)

bill5 said:


> Anything below the $300 mark, never mind at and/or above it, is more than decent, it's quite good. Very generally speaking, it gets better as you go up, but as stated earlier, it becomes more a question of features, not quality.


Not really. Good AD/DA converters are expensive. It is not economically feasible for something like a Scarlett 2i2, for example, to have premium converters. RME Babyface Pro converters are MUCH better than Scarlett's --- but it comes with a cost.


----------



## mscp (Jul 10, 2021)

Gerbil said:


> The room is properly treated and everything set up as it should be. I still can't hear the difference. It's not like listening to those old soundblaster cards where there were clearly differences in the stereo field. They both sound pretty identical. The bigger factor may be that I'm nearing 50 and I doubt my hearing is as good as it once was.


To test whether aging is a factor in your case, go to a professional studio that has Prism Audio, Antelope, or Lynx setups. Record a grand piano, or a harp. If you can't tell the difference then...you've got the answer.


----------



## bill5 (Jul 10, 2021)

Phil81 said:


> Not really.


Yeah, really!



> Good AD/DA converters are expensive.


No they aren't. Not any more.



> It is not economically feasible for something like a Scarlett 2i2, for example, to have premium converters. RME Babyface Pro converters are MUCH better than Scarlett's --- but it comes with a cost.


They don't have to be the very best to be really good. The gap has narrowed a truckload in recent years. You spend a lot more money for marginal quality improvement, if any.


----------

