Thanks, that Would be great! I use an older MacBook Pro. I can’t remember witch os it runs. I’m not home right now, but I will be in two days, then I can check.
Thanks! I will look into some of these. I have a zoom h6 so I might start putting that more to use. But I’m looking for something with more inputs aswell. I have a tascam mixer with 10 in/outs I used to track with my mpc 3k. But the tascam broke. Lately I have just made stereo track outs. Straight to my Mac or to a sp 404 or 303 if I did not want to connect to my Mac.
Cool.
Also please let me know which connection type you have available on your Macbook pro.
I’ll also need to know at which sample rate you record and if you absolutely need midi connection on the interface or word clock or ADAT SMUX in and out.
Also, do you need preamps on the interface or only converters ?
1 Like
Lots of good advice and suggestions, been taking them all into consideration.
As in the original post my plan was to maybe get an outboard mixer…
After researching for days i’ve kinda come to the conclusion I should rather stay in the box for now and focus more on getting a good audio interface.
I do love the idea of having the 2400 going through a mixer and being able to mix with eq on the console rather than a computer, i just think it will be something ill regret.
On my laptop I have easy access to UAD and Waves plug-ins, very top notch channel strips and all the rest of it…
…but even without them, just something as simple as the Ableton stock eq, all of which i’m very familiar with.
When I see most of these outboard mixers the eq section is very limited (fixed bands etc.)
Some of you might want to tell me how the difference between any plug-in and a hands on mixer (no matter how limited its eq is) is night and day, or you might say the opposite and agree with my worries. I honestly don’t know having only ever worked in the box so all I can do is go with my gut feeling and your advice. I wish i had money to throw about and just dabble in a bit of this and a bit of that but sadly I don’t so any choice I make is a nail biting cliff hanger of epic proportions…well, it is for me at least anyway.
So…as I said I’m gonna most likely go the audio interface route… a good quality one that will see me right for more than a fair few years. My current one is the Focusrite Saffire 6 (yeh i know, “and baller of the year award goes to…not me”)
I did have the Apollo twin a few years back but ended up selling it when I kinda gave up on music and sold most of my stuff.
Sooooo (apologies for my lengthy ramblings…which haven’t finished yet)
My question is this:
When it comes to an interface do I need 8 inputs/outputs for the s2400 or is this only if I need to be recording all 8 tracks in at the same time…?
Would it be just as well buying a higher quality interface with less inputs/outputs and just recording my tracks in from the s2400 one by one?
(Just saw the SSL Six mixing console last night, safe to say it did not make my decision to stay in the box easy…)
1 Like
Yeh I do currently have the UAD Octo pcie card. So the Apollo twin would be a nice little extra dsp booster. I’m just concerned at the amount of I/Os.
Are there any big benefits of having all 8 tracks coming out the s2400 independently rather than recording in through the twin one by one?
The benefits is that you can make change to individual tracks rather then having to collapse your mix to ‘‘buses’’ if I can say it that way.
Imagine you compose some music on the S2400.
You have :
Track 1 a Kick
Track 2 a Snare
Track 3 Open and Closed Hi hats
Track 4 A Bass line
Track 5 and 6 Your main sample phrase that will most likely be stereo
Track 7 and 8 Your extra filers instruments and FX so you can pan them and have a bit of life in your mix.
Now imagine you have all those tracks ( very basic setup to be honest ) and you only have 4 channel in your PC.
Track 1 : Kick and Bass
Track 2 : Top drums ( Snare and Hi hats, cymbals )
Track 3 and 4 : Your main sample plus all fillers and effects.
What are you supose to do if you ‘‘fawked’’ the mix up when bouncing back to tape ( PC ) ?
Bad Kick bass balance…or too edgy hihats that cant be eqed without destroying the bite of your snare
What if you mixed your FX too heavy on your 3-4 vs your main sample ?
You want to go back and bounce it back again and sync it or you prefer having it all spread out in your DAW and treat accordingly ?
Recording one by one is a pain and very time consuming.
4 minute song x 6 tracks ( 4 mono + 2 stereo ) Thanks but not for me.
Huge drop in workflow and inspiration momentum.
Get all in there seperated so if the track make the cut, you can send the dry to your mix engineer with proper track split.
If you can afford the SSL Six or the X-desk, go for it, those are great mixers but youll be limited to a 2 track in as well so be ready for endless bounce to get the correct balance.
And thats 2 click to export…
Imagine outboard gear…
Start with the obvious first part that can bottleneck you.
4 Likes
Yeh i hear you totally, this problem even arising for me in DAWS (ill always have as many individual tracks as i can (kicks, Snares, sample phrase 1, sample phrase 2 etc) but ill always end up grouping my drums or my sample to its own group track, then applying stuff like compression, Decimort, phasers and all the rest of it.
But when my cpu starts lagging ill have no choice but to mix down for a fresh cpu session with my grouped audio group tracks…many times when i start mastering i want to bring the snare down a bit or something but cant do so without effecting the whole group rather than just the snare.
So yes i definitely see the benefit of what you are saying.
As for the time taken to record them in individually for me i wouldn’t say its so much of a problem, not ideal yes but not a huge problem. As i wouldn’t necessarily be recording full tracks in per track, but more so loops.
But (this is just me thinking off the top of my head) I really can see the advantage of the extra I/Os if i were wanting to record on the fly automation of filters and so on on the s2400.
And also i guess its better to have extra I/Os and not need than to not have and need.
These (attached images) are what I’ve got my eye on at the moment…would appreciate any feedback.
The Clarett and the Scarlett are really 2 different beast. I’d cheer for the Clarett, not for the Scarlett.
For many years I hold grudges against Focusrite because 2 of my friends home studio had them (18i20) and I always found their track to sound doll when they transfered it. I then heard the Red series at a friend studio and was blown away so I gave the Clarett a try and understood the gap between the two product.
I also had experience ( 21 years ago when I started my career ) with the Motu 828 that I found breath taking sound wise but a complete pain in the arse to operate. Please note that I was also on Digital performer, which didnt help…but today, I wouldnt even touch it with a stick , just like the Antelope ( aka aardvark, if anyone remember the horror stories ). I also bought a Motu 896 MK3 about 3 years ago thinking it would be a plug and play slave for 8 more inputs on my setup and AGAIN, I ended up having the unit in my hand and having the thought that I’d have to do a plastering job on my wall if I did what I wanted to do with it in the end. MOTU, never again, on my life.
The RME , to me, is synonyme of Rock solid drivers. If you need 8in and 10 out, look at the Fireface800 but test it before you buy and make sure theres no issue with the PSU (known issue ). That’d be my go out of that lot . ( its a firewire discontinued interface, so theres that and youd need to make sure there driver compatibility with your OS )
I cant talk for the Tascam nor the Arturia unit but I’d personally keep them on the side as a ‘‘nice try jack’’ per plugin manufacturer for arturia like NI. But its just prejudice as I never used them and even the behringer unit sound like a scarlett nowadays so it might not be a complete dump neither. But I red some nice review of the Audiofuse…thats all I know about it to be honest .
Its always kind of stupid to try to suggest gear to unknown individual on the internet because theres so many factor that come in play and what gear you match it with including Hi-z intruments makes a world of a difference.
I know it will sound awkward but still, I need to say it… If you can try them, do it and listen carefully.
My pick would be a Fireface800 and not the UC.
If you were to go for 4 inputs, Id pick the Audient ID44 over the UC. Great interface.
But as a new interface, go with the Clarett 8pre. It really does what it do best at a very decent price point. Very Low latency to, so theres also that.
2 Likes
Why the Fireface 800 though and not the Fireface UC? The latter is newer and has improved converters AFAIK.
I for one would never want to go back to anything that’s connected to the computer via Firewire. So finicky in regards to the FW adapter, its drivers and the motherboard chipset/drivers and many other idiosyncrasies.
The FF UC is a great interface.
Why the FF800 over the UC?
For the amount of out but mostly for the price difference between the two vs the feature set.
UC has 1 set of S/MUX , the FF800 has 2 for 8 extra in and out tracks at 96khz.
The UC has 1 midi I/0, the FF800 has 2 seperated ones…
The UC has 2 preamp, the FF800 has 4.
I never had any issue with my FF800 but the only issue I heard was people having to get the PSU recapped.
I dont know what idiosyncrasies you’re talking about, I never heard anyone having any issue with the RME Fireface connections. Never.
It’s a rock solid interface and easy to setup.
UC converter specs :
-
Dynamic range AD: 110 dB RMS unweighted, 113 dBA
-
THD AD: < -100 dB (< 0.001 %)
-
THD+N AD: < -98 dB (< 0.0012 %)
-
Crosstalk AD: > 110 dB
-
Dynamic range DA: 110 dB RMS unweighted, 113 dBA (unmuted)
-
THD DA: -100 dB (0.001 %)
-
THD+N DA: -96 dB (0.0015 %)
-
Crosstalk DA: > 110 dB
FF800 Converter specs :
Dynamic range AD: 109 dB RMS unweighted, 112 dBA
THD AD: < -110 dB (< 0.00032 %)
THD+N AD: < -104 dB (< 0.00063 %)
Crosstalk AD: > 110 dB
Dynamic range DA: 116 dB RMS unweighted, 119 dBA (unmuted)
THD DA: < -103 dB (< 0.0007 %)
THD+N DA: < -100 dB (< 0.001 %)
Crosstalk DA: > 110 dB
Not that its noticeable but the specs from RME says that the UC converter are actually worst then the FF800. Actually, the only place where the UC has better feature set is on the dynamic range of its AD by 1 db and a USB connection.
It seems like a very obvious decision to me.
1 Like
Yeh i was looking on ebay and get them for around £200 starting bid…that would be one hell of a saving, my pc tower has firewire ports so that shouldn’t be an issue…i hope…not quite sure what PSU is but ill try look into it
2 Likes
If you can get a FF800 for 200 or even up to 500 pounds that would be one hell of a deal.
The PSU is the part delivering power to the different component of your hardware.
The issue with the PSU in the RME FF800 is that some capacitor blow up or overheat. You’d notice it by seeing a little bump on top of the capacitor.
A capacitor is those electronic component that look like a little batterie.
If a PSU was to go kaput, you’d have multiple possible result but most likely your Audio interface wouldnt work anymore. Some otheres have experienced noise in the preamps or general noise in the converters.
The PSU fix is an easy fix as the PSU is easily accessible and removable once you open the RME chassis.
Any decent electronic repair person could fix it. Just make some research on which capacitors are needed, take your unit to the repair guy and point him out in the correct dirrection. its a 30 minute job maximum and should cost you under 50 squids. ( thats if theres an issue )
PS. Buy the capacitor before you go see the repair guy, you’re less likely to get screwed and wait forever for your unit…
Here’s a funny video. You’ll get it.
1 Like
Firewire was an issue back in the day like I said in regards to the many constellations of chipset drivers and FW-card drivers and firmware. Nowadays it’s even worse with the support by 3rd parties. Really, it’s not sane to go that route. I can only warn about it. You do what you think is right for you.
PS: I bought my Fireface UC pre-loved on eBay for €530 in 2013 or so. It’s a rock-solid interface that will have no issues with any computer / motherboard / USB2.0 upwards bus/hub. It just works very well.
If you want more periphery and functions with the same rock solid USB performance, you coul also go with one of the larger RME interfaces.
Are you sure you’re not inverting models ?
You’re the only person I ever heard saying they had Firewire connection issues with the FW800.
I made a quick search on googgle and here’s what came up…
Nope, I’m not inverting models. Though I didn’t have experience of problems with RME and FireWire per se - just had a Multiface with RME’s proprietary protocol in the past and a Digi003 with FW which itself was not stable - I knew that even back then FW audio made problems with many users.
It had an unstable connection port, was very finicky with various PCI/PCIE/PCMCIA cards and motherboard chipsets and was on the decline at the beginning of the 2010’s and is virtually dead now.
Nowadays very few specialized motherboards come equipped with the port and you can totally forget about it on laptops.
If you have a powerhouse PC or Mac from 2011 laying around which has no other use than to serve as the medium to a very inexpensively bought FW interface from eBay, yeah ok… I’d still think it’s burnt money.
You are virtually the only one today still recommending pure FW interfaces. It’s IMHO not very wise to burn money there. The ancient computer to support that old interface will not be up to snuff with an off-the-shelve laptop from 2018.
The FF UC is the better choice today.
I was wondering why everything you stated so far ended up being debunked ( starting by the technical proof of the UC vs FF800 then going on the stability of the FF800) but re-redeading your comment, I now understand it is emotionally driven and has no stable base in factual reality.
I do appreciate that kind of counter weight as an argument but paying the same money for an inferior product is never advisable.
Try googling Hip Hop is Dead, pretty cool read to.
Oh come on. Don’t take it so personal.
What did you debunk though?
The tech specs may say that areas of the audio and conversion stages of the FF800 are better (lower THD AD and THD+N AD and better dyn. range DA), while others are not, but the UC is technically the newer development.
And no, it’s not emotionally driven, it’s pure rationale. Short form is “FW is not supported anymore” and “you won’t find a good computer for it nowadays”.
Will you do the support and debugging for wax100beats when he will inevitably have FW issues?
And then there’s the complication of sourcing capacitors and finding the electronics guy for the needed PSU fix.
Yeah, driven emotionally and not based on facts, again.
The complication of Sourcing capacitors ( EBay : Capacitors 220 uf just for fun )
and finding the electrionic guy … ( Google electronic repair near me )
WAOW !! Youre more of a champ then I originally thought.
Now I understand. You really dont have a single clue of what youre talking about.
Your intervention was…interesting, to say the least.
Pay more for a less capable product my friend, thats natural selection right there.
All the best.
Again,
And you should know that the FF UC doesn’t sell for much more than the FF 800 on the used market.
The UC goes for an average of 450€ and the lowest 800 I saw went for 406€. The lowest FF UC I saw was sold for 280€.
Talk about irrational behavior and natural selection… lol
All the best to you too.