Maybe get your point, but reading lots of relevant posts and they are starting to become unusable mush.Sage advice. ^
Asking about latency specs is like asking whether a razor has three or four blades.
I mainly work with VSTi's but sometimes record vocals. So, yes was referring to quality for recording, but also for the sound that's coming out of the audio interface to the monitors.
I'm using the same cpu, ram, using ssd as yours. I just bought Clarett 4Pre to replace my Steinberg UR22mkii. To me if you mostly work on vsti. UR22mkii is better to my system. It produce less click pop sound than Clarett when using low buffer (about 256). Clarett is not that bad tho. I need 4 input so I bought Clarett.A PC upgrade is out of my budget right now. Current PC is Intel i7-6800K, 4.2ghz, 64GB RAM, all SSD drives.
Budget for the new audio interface (if I get one) is £1,000 GBP.
I think it really comes down to driver stability and personal preference, both Fucusrite and RME have good drivers, and RME has a good reputation for this. One really needs to hear them in their studio setup to determine if there's any audible benefit. Also, it depends what type of I/O's you need. For example, the Clarett 2Pre USB has physical MIDI ports.The why would RME offer more than Clarett 2Pre USB?
Duuuhhhhh … THX for wake-up call!I think it really comes down to driver stability and personal preference, both Fucusrite and RME have good drivers, and RME has a good reputation for this. One really needs to hear them in their studio setup to determine if there's any audible benefit. Also, it depends what type of I/O's you need. For example, the Clarett 2Pre USB has physical MIDI ports.
I haven't A/B-ed the two, but all things being equal, higher-end interfaces simply sound better. They have better electronics surrounding the digital converter chips, and if they're not designed better, they cut fewer corners.Maybe get your point, but reading lost of relevant posts and they are starting to become unusable mush.
Are you stating that Latency is not the issue here ? The why would RME offer more than Clarett 2Pre USB?
Thank-you for follow-up ! I'm getting clearer on careful attention to critical links in the chain.*******
RME makes high-quality interfaces. The guy who does their engineering, I believe the head of the company, is really good. They've been able to boast excellent latency specs, and their drivers are solid. That was especially important in the early days of software sampling - their cards were the ones most people preferred for Gigastudio machines.
Now, I don't mean to say that latency isn't important, but as people have said, the big fish is how powerful your computer system is, and especially whether you have SSDs. A more powerful computer will let you work at a lower buffer setting; each setting usually increments up or down by 100% (128 vs. 256 samples for example), and that's pretty drastic compared to the driver (because all the drivers are fine these days). **********
Speaking of my favorite subject (myself), about 12 years ago I had several interfaces here for a big article. The RME Fireface was the third most expensive and it sounded the third best. But the differences at (then) the $1500 - $2000 level were extremely subtle. *******
The 2882 was the first Metric Halo I ever tried and it sold me on the company.I ended up choosing the Metric Halo 2882, which still kicks serious arse day in and out - and they just came out with a major hardware update for it that lets it connect by Ethernet, among other things. But its mic preamps don't have a lot of gain - I use a stand-alone one made by Millennia Media.
No not much really. When you run at lower latency the cpu has to work harder to keep up. A low latency audio interface can run at a lower latency setting but you probably won’t use it at a low setting because of your cpu.I've noticed with Cubase that when you use plug-ins with quite a bit of latency (on playback), the asio load can jump up quite a lot with some of them. So if roundtrip latency is reduced by an interface with better, lower latency in general, surely that's going to help with the asio load in Cubase?
Some plug-ins carry a fair bit of latency with them, though... So surely, on playback (mixing etc), if you've got 30/40 tracks+ with VST plug-ins (tracks being VST instruments, audio, FX, busses/groups, mix bus) you wouldn't want a low buffer setting? Wouldn't there simply be too much processing to do with the lower settings (and thus dropouts/crackles etc)?No not much really. When you run at lower latency the cpu has to work harder to keep up. A low latency audio interface can run at a lower latency setting but you probably won’t use it at a low setting because of your cpu.
Hi, thanks for the reply.Latency from the soundcard and latency from plugins are two different things.
Soundcard latency is mainly caused by the size of the audio buffer you choose to use. The smaller the buffer, the lower latency but higher crunch on cpu. If you use a larger buffer you get more breathing room for the cpu to do what it needs to do, so a larger buffer size will be lower cpu usage, but with higher latency.
The audio card itself can also have some built in hardware latency which you have no control over it. But the difference between one soundcard and another is often maybe 1ms difference in terms of that. A soundcard might have a more efficient driver then another which could lower the latency per the buffer, but again this difference between most soundcards is very slight. However what is important for you to realize is that your buffer setting has a much bigger impact on cpu usage. With a low buffer setting the cpu will be cranking more. With a high setting it will be easier in the cpu. An rme pci card is notorious for low latency which means take whatever buffer setting you need to use for all the plugins running on your cpu and maybe take a couple ms of latency off that due to soundcard efficiency. But if you have a large buffer for lots of plugins then you might be talking about the difference between say 15ms or 13ms in an rme, something like that.
But none of the above has anything at all to do with latency caused by plugins. Plugins with large latency add that latency REGARDLESS of what soundcard you use and in addition to the soundcard latency.