As an electronics designer, I want to point out that the way you calculate the required bandwidth is fine, as long as the connection is capable of transferring the data you need within the minimum latency you required without adding any significant latency of it's own to the mix. I'm not saying that USB 2.0 isn't fast enough for audio, I only wish to add to the conversation :) I'm going a bit deep, but I'm sharing my experiences when designing and specifying data connections for applications. Hopefully it has something to add. Let's say you have 32 sample data buffer and 100 channels of 44.1khz@24bits of data. Thus each sample accounts for ~23 microseconds of real time and thus 32 sample buffer accounts for ~0,74 milliseconds. That amount of data in this example comes to 24bits/sample * (32samples/buffer)= 768bits/buffer * 100 channels, so required bandwidth is 76,8kbits / 0,74 milliseconds (0,00074s), or ~103megabits / second. [ 76,8kbits * (1s/0,00074s) = ~103megabits/s ] If the bandwidth of the connection is such, that to transfer of the data happens before the next buffer is to be sent, it should be fine, right? Because no dropouts occur. But that minimum required transfer speed means that it takes as long as the size of the buffer in REAL TIME to transfer all the data over the connection that barely meets the requirements. And that effectively DOUBLES the latency from 0,74ms to 1,48ms.. just from the speed of the connection. In this instance, USB2.0 has ~4 times the required bandwidth and thus _shouldn't_ introduce any meaningful latency to the connection, right? Oh, but USB 2.0 is HALF DUPLEX, thus unless your connection is completely one way only and doesn't transfer audio back to the interface outputs as well, we've halved our total bandwidth from 480mbits/s to 240mbits/s. But we've also affected the LATENCY because to transfer that data over the connection first requires the input data to be sent over the connection, then we have to wait for the output data to be sent or they're out of sync. Thus if you can transfer 100 channels in e.g 1ms one way, it takes 2ms to transfer both inputs AND outputs. So half duplex not only halves your total bandwidth, it also doubles your latency for bidirectional communication UNLESS it can be completely out of sync where you can just push the data to the IO when it arrives without waiting all other channels. But that's undesirable. Also, each transfer has overhead in regards to protocol AND because the chip-sets themselves have RX/TX buffers that in most instances you cannot change or affect. all that adds latency, depending. So what if I double the buffer? Well now you've increased the latency obviously, but we've not changed our bandwidth requirements at all. So what did we learn? Our available bandwidth ALWAYS adds to the overall latency of the system and at MINIMUM bandwidth required, it doubles the latency (obviously more than that, because overheads and everything else). And even if you decrease the latency requirements, only the percentage of the total latency that the data connection is responsible of, decreases. But it cannot add less than what's minimum required to transfer the data without dropouts. And USB isn't very efficient anyway. There's other chatter on the bus, OS's don't do very good job at minimizing overheads that exist beyond drivers abilities, you have the chip-sets RX/TX buffers to contend with, the IRQ stuff... so it can be either very solid or VERY POOR. and you might not reach very low buffers in many cases and even if the driver says "32 samples" the total latency might be something completely different. Thunderbolt is VERY efficient and VERY fast. Thus it adds almost nothing to the overall latency. It's less chatty, is full duplex and has less between it and the processors DMA controller than USB, thus you can achieve way more stable setups in very low latencies. And it eats less CPU resources since it HAS the DMA and direct access to the processor without the OS interfering. Thus other stuff going on in the system doesn't so easily cause buffer under runs on software side norwithin the processor interrupt system because it uses less interrupts (DMA). USB3.0 is also ways better, but it's still USB with some issues that USB2.0 had as well. Are they really worth it? Well... _maybe_? :D It all depends on what you do and what you need exactly. I hope this gives any insights or understanding :)
@Fkyoughhgf
Жыл бұрын
Yeha that right , people learn here .
@ProAudioIQ
Жыл бұрын
Wow! This is absolutely fantastic added insight and info. Thank you!!
@vanessajazp6341
11 ай бұрын
I have an old firewire interface that I still use for the very reasons you noted. The limitations of processing audio signals to and from your DAW without introducing unacceptable latency. My interface my not be near as fast as USB 3.1, but it has broader bandwidth and can simultaneously snd and receive data. Would love to move up to Thunderbolt, but there are too few options and most are cost prohibitive.
@theocorfiatis8456
10 ай бұрын
I'm very glad you made these points, because over the past 25 years I've used many different Audio Interfaces with connections ranging from USB 2.0 through to Thunderbolt 1, 2, 3 and up to PCIe cards setup for DMA access (RME AES to be precise). The worst audio performance I had was using USB 2.0, which had lots of dropouts, huge latency, and if MIDI was also connected, there always seemed to be stability issues. Thunderbolt 1 to 3 got progressively better, with an AVID OMNI Native HD thunderbolt system giving me very stable performance and large track counts with tons of plugins including a MIDI USB interface. But the best performance by far was using an RME AES card on a PCIe bus on a Windows PC. MIDI was flawless. Latency was unbelievably good, where I could run large track counts at 64 samples while recording with no dropouts or glitches. Audio was also flawless, and whatever I threw at this system it did without complaining. The downside was the messing around with different components to find a Graphics card which gave me the most stable audio. Since I now no longer own a Windows computer with PCIe slots, a Mac with TB-3 is the next best thing, and I can get excellent performance and stability using a Lynx Aurora (n) with TB-3 and MIDI over USB 3.0. If you paid me, I would never go back to using USB 2.0 for audio + MIDI. But I'm still hankering for a PCIe based setup on a PC even though I think the Mac Core Audio is a lot easier on the nerves, than getting a Windows PC to work efficiently with audio.
@vanessajazp6341
10 ай бұрын
@@theocorfiatis8456 I never understood how PCIe interfaces actually work in practice. I know you plug the card directly into the computer motherboard, but the analog instrument still needs a device to convert the signal to analog. Or do you plug the analog instrument directly into an input on the card itself? Either I'm really stupid or that whole process has never been adequately explained for newbies.
@someonesomewhere4446
Жыл бұрын
this youtube channel is radicaly solving all my last unsolved problems, cheers Audio University I love you so much !!! ❤
@truecuckoo
2 жыл бұрын
Top audio interface! I’ve been using MKI for a few years, and it’s great. Been eyeing this MKII with on-board recording and improved on-device controls among other things.
@Tanekoshima
2 жыл бұрын
Wonderful video! Nice to see another RME fan making good work. When I was first starting out I remember getting a second gen Scarlett 2i2 and not using it to its full potential. I would have at least 700ms of monitoring latency through Studio One and decide to just use the Scarlett's direct monitoring function. This went on for about a whole 6 months before I started doing more research into audio engineering and understood what buffering and sampling rate were and how they worked. I properly configured it and had basically sub 100ms latency and was very happy that my 2i2 has that capability. During this whole time I was wondering if I needed to upgrade to Thunderbolt but was always held back by the costs. Nowadays I feel like Intel and Apple just need to push it as "better" simply because they have stakes in the technology and not necessarily because "Oh, it's just better dude." Went through a couple other interfaces, all USB, and all perfectly capable (with great emphasis on my old Audient id22, fantastic preamps) and eventually bought a Babyface Pro on sale and have been loving this thing ever since. I hardly feel like I'll ever need to upgrade (emphasis on need, I do want to upgrade to a Fireface like yours in the video) since my work consists mostly of my voice over work, sound design, light mixing and post-production, I don't work with music production so I'll never need to run 200 tracks simultaneously. Very refreshing to see a well made video take a pragmatic approach to this topic! Congrats again!
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for sharing your thoughts here, Tanekoshima! Very helpful. Glad you've found the Babyface Pro. Great interface!
@ebormajaw8064
2 жыл бұрын
Your videos are awesome. I've shared your channel to many of my friends who need a professional teacher like you... You're the best..
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Thank you! I’m glad you enjoy the videos.
@Brittjones
2 жыл бұрын
This is a very important video on a topic I’ve been thinking about for months…thanks!
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Glad it was helpful! Thanks for watching, Britt!
@LittleStudiosOnline
2 жыл бұрын
You can almost forget about Thunderbolt if you have an AMD processor. Very few AMD boards support Thunderbolt and the ones that do are expensive.
@LittleStudiosOnline
2 жыл бұрын
I have a MOTU 8 Pre-es which supports both USB 2.0 and Thunderbolt 1. I'm also running an AMD Ryzen 9 and I was super pumped until I learned after the fact about the lack of support for Thunderbolt on AMD. The reality of it is most of my projects are mixing projects for clients and not recording. I don't use outboard gear, so lots of ins and outs aren't needed. USB 2.0 works awesome for me.
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for sharing, LittleStudiosOnline!
@rileyioacura
2 жыл бұрын
The new Ryzen 6000 Chips can use USB4 even with Thunderbolt 3 support.. USB4 2.0 will be able to use 80Gbps twice as fast as Thunderbolt 4
@assshakerstudios549
2 жыл бұрын
Amd straight up said they will not support Thunderbolt because it's an enemy's tech(Intel). I've always had insane lens with AMDs stuff. Everything from GPU problems to motherboard problems, cpu's failing and needing to be replaced. All sorts of shit. So it's unfortunate that Intel is sucking for the past 8yrs. Still, I have always had less issues with them.
@KillaHafiz89
2 жыл бұрын
@@rileyioacura Intel recently announced a new Thunderbolt version with speeds of up to 80gbps. They haven't said if they will call it Tb5 or Tb4v2, but it's definitely on the way.
@ProckGnosis
2 жыл бұрын
Great overview and explanation regarding the bandwidth and utility USB 2 still offers. Been an RME fan for quite a few years now, and a quite satisfied user of the Fireface UC and Babyface.
@RoyMaya
Жыл бұрын
Good choice! I myself have been a RME user for the past 17 years. I started off with the Fireface 800 and now use a Fireface 802. Rock solid with great latency performance.
@AudioUniversity
Жыл бұрын
Nice! Thanks for watching and sharing your experience, Roy!
@andrewbulatovych590
Ай бұрын
Is there difference in sound 800&802? For me ff800 sounded crystal clear and my babyface pro little flatter and not so clear as 800. Now I want to change it to rack rme, cause I think their analog components are better, so thinking about 802 or ufx+. Thanks
@munton5150
2 жыл бұрын
The Motu 828ES supports Thunderbolt and USB2 which is one big reason I bought it. Drivers have been rock solid so far (on Thunderbolt).
@jermaineflowers1538
2 жыл бұрын
I have the ucx and the Babyface and it's extremely stable and fast. I record at near zero latency about 35 with regular USB 2.
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Nice! Thanks for sharing, Jermaine!
@sasha_________
8 ай бұрын
Thank you, I was surprised when I looked at the Babyface Pro performances and saw a USB 2.0 port ! Now I get it
@doctersound9630
Жыл бұрын
I knew most of that, but loved hearing it all again! Thank you!
@wiseoldfool
2 жыл бұрын
Clear, informative, and not condescending. I've subscribed, I think I can learn a lot from you.
@n050up4u
6 ай бұрын
Seems like there was a key point missed on thunderbolt. Thunderbolt is a dedicated port, where USB is shared with multiple ports on your system, it can be congested if the rear of your machine is "streaming gamer ready" with 30 different devices just to make a single light swirl colors.
@MichaelCurtisAudio
2 жыл бұрын
I see that KZitem plaque! Congrats, man. Another great video. Keep it up.
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks, Michael!
@jas_bataille
2 жыл бұрын
This is a great video however, there are a few things that are unfortunately incorrect, so let me kindly point them out : 1) The bandwidth shown here are the *theorical* max bandwidths and not the real-world transfer speeds bu the bulk packet *size*. In real world use, bandwidth is occupied by communications with the host device (your computer) as well as being affected if the cable provides both power and data connection (as in all bus-powered interfaces) because then a significant portion of the conductive materials in the cable are utilized to transfer the 5V necessary to power the interface. In real-world, a Thunderbold 3 device of top performance will give you around 2.3 to 2.5 gigs per second for data transfer rates. SInce we are all nerds here is the real explanation "USB 2 uses 1 millisecond frames, and in High Speed (480 Mb/s) mode they are divided into 8 micro-frames. The maximum size of bulk packets (used by USB mass storage devices) is 512 bytes. According to this very informative document the theoretical maximum is 13 packets per microframe. So the theoretical maximum speed of a USB 2 drive is: 1000 * 8 * 512 * 13 = 53248000 ~= 53 MB/s" Therefore, 46MB/s is dangerously close to the theorical max speed os USB 2.0, so why not use a 3.0 bus which is super-cheap anwway? That's quite weird to me. Kind of like they want to prove a point and their drivers are amazing enough to keep up but still, if you don't have a really perfect connector on your computer's side, you will run into issues if you full that interface up. 2) USB 3.0 gives you 4.8 Gb/s; USB 3.1 gen 1 gives 5Gb/s bulk packet max size (the difference is marketing really), USB 3.1 gen 2 gives you 10 Gb/s max size; Thunderbolt 1 gives you the same 10Gb/s size (*not* speed). Thunderbolt 2 (usually uses MiniDisplay port, although USB-C ports can also be used in certain drive enclosures) has a bulk packet max size of 20Gb/s. Thunderbolt 3 gives you 40gb/s max size, and USB4 *also* give you 40gb/s max size. This is because USB and Thunderbolt are competing protocols, but USB is universal, while Thunderbolt is proprietary and belongs to Apple and Intel. Therefore it takes less time for them to produce it because it does not have to go through 2 bazillions tests like a universal protocol has to. Then they can sell TB ports to other manufacturers. In reality USB ports are a much better value for money. They sound more generic; USB 4 is the same as TB 4. It just came out a little bit after. Thunderbolt is 100% marketing, and in fact, is inferior since it's not tested as rigorously nor is it available on most devices. In practice, USB 4 and TB 3 are the exact same, TB 2 and USB 3.1 gen 2 are also the exact same, and so on. I know, the nomenclature is really confusing.
@JoBu133
2 жыл бұрын
The RME interfaces with EQ, dynamics and FX, do have a DSP chip onboard. It has even a DSP meter in TotalMix FX. The UCX2 as well.
@OfficialLemnisc8
2 жыл бұрын
It's a shame the dsp in babyface is stripped back to eq and reverb, no Dynamics at all :(
@JoBu133
2 жыл бұрын
@@OfficialLemnisc8 That’s because of the power consumption from a bigger dsp. It would not be able to be bus powered anymore.
@OfficialLemnisc8
2 жыл бұрын
@@JoBu133 oh I know the why, it still sucks though. It can accept dc power, why not just disable the dynamics when bus powered, enable them when dc powered instead of removed altogether. Just figured that would have been better. I mean, I still went and bought a babyface last week anyway so I'm gonna enjoy it regardless :)
@jaydensydes3478
2 жыл бұрын
USB drivers are less efficient in general due to the way USB indirectly interfaces with the CPU, and USB itself involves a fixed bus latency. WIth thunderbolt and PCIE based audio interfaces, you have a lower starting point for your round trip latency which gives you another unit of buffer size, sample rate, or plugin delay to play with before approaching perceivable monitoring delay. This can be invaluable in some situations. Also, since you can do dynamics and EQ processing in totalmix fx with that audio interface, the interface does in fact have a DSP chip. I'm assuming you meant you just can't chuck on proprietary processors at any stage of the signal path like UAD and PTHD interfaces can. I am very glad you mentioned the bandwidth misconception and driver efficiency though. USB 2.0 is more than enough and RME drivers absolutely slap.
@crackedmagnet
2 жыл бұрын
I agree, the fixed bus latency is a key reason for using thunderbolt over USB. For many applications it doesn't matter that much, but for some it matters a lot.
@jaydensydes3478
2 жыл бұрын
@@crackedmagnet 100 percent, i'll reiterate what you said by saying that USB is definitely more than adequate for majority of recording situations. I believe a lot of people get conned into buying thunderbolt interfaces due to bad experience with suboptimal drivers from brands that don't care.
@sorbpen
2 жыл бұрын
In what situations is that "invaluable" Jayden.... name one.
@jaydensydes3478
2 жыл бұрын
@@sorbpen live tracking into a project that was given to you with a bus processor that has delay on it but is necessary for the vibe so you don't have to bother with creating sub projects, live monitoring chains, disabling half the project, or freezing. Only to undo all of that again for the final mix. Saves you a lot of time. And as I said in the comment, it gives you one extra thing to play with. You can reclaim some of that latency with the minimum buffer setting that you'd have by working on 48khz instead of 96khz, which is more CPU efficient. Higher number of plugins overall regardless of if they introduce latency or not. Stability if you use your daw in live music to run lights and Fx chains, monitoring and foh. Etc
@sorbpen
2 жыл бұрын
@@jaydensydes3478 I fail to see where in any of those use cases the difference between RME 2.0 USB drivers, and thunderbolt latency would make any difference at all, except possibly running lights, but any DMX system worth it's money will let you offset so you can sync with whatever audio you are feeding to your audience and or live performers. Your guitarist is used to at least 12-25ms delay just from standing a few feet from his amp, etc etc. So i still think the word "invaluable" is a bit strong here. USB can poll up to 1000hz, i don't know what poling rate the RME drivers or other interfaces are running at, someone might be able to chime in, if it was say 125hz like early USB devices sure then we can talk. I was considering getting a PCI-e card from RME at one point, but decided on picking up a Fireface 400 because i came to the same conclusion as this video the latency difference would be neigh unnoticeable if i went looking for it and for my use-cases completely moot, that interface is what 15 years old now? I got it because it had firewire. My reasoning was that since I'm a bedroom producer, and programmer i kinda need to use my computer for other things as well. And in my experience the quality of USB drivers from different manufacturers of peripherals are of varying quality to put it kindly. So keeping it on a separate bus sounded like a good idea. Now please correct me if I'm wrong but the use case for thunderbolt that i see would be massive interfaces with hundreds of I/O, and to my knowledge there are very few of those on the market
@KixPanganiban
2 жыл бұрын
One thing that I think you haven't touched on, especially when it comes to different versions of USB, is power delivery. Some ADC/audio interfaces come with built-in processing (Revelator io series, Apollo, Antelope come to mind) which require more power. The different preamps and phantom power supplies also demand different types of power. USB 2.0 can only do around 2.5 w (@ 5V 500mA), while USB 3.0/3.1 can do 4.5W (@ 5V 900mA). Thunderbolt on the other hand, can do around 9.9W (@ 18V 550mA). Something to keep in mind
@DaneReidVoiceOver
2 жыл бұрын
My Apollo X4 is thunderbolt 3/4 only. I love the plugins. When i switched from an Apollo Twin USB to the X4, the difference in my audio was clearly noticable. There may be other things going on but i love the sound difference.
@DaneReidVoiceOver
Жыл бұрын
If anyone tells you to DM them on telegram in the comment section in KZitem, they are scammers. Pay attention and let them know you know they are scammers
@petegaslondon
Жыл бұрын
"Telegram Spam, Telegram Spam.." 'Telegram SAM!' "No, its ok I sent him an email" What he says @Dane Reid
@inceptor1
29 күн бұрын
Just M2C: I still run a RME Hammerfall 9652 in my studio in Munich. It is "on duty" since 2002. That's what you can call quality and durability.
@yerbigbeanoyeah
2 жыл бұрын
Excellent video. As an RME owner in the past and a potential UFX+ customer I am completely sold on RME products. What is missing from the video are any numbers on the round trip latency in your setup between USB 2-3 or Thunderbolt. I find that omission troubling,. However latency as a feature of products lacks an accepted standard so I get why it may be missing. The only thing I find missing in the current RME approach is DANTE. Again I understand DANTE licensing adds $300ish dollars to your product and their approval process my require revealing more than RME wants to reveal. Love it or not DANTE has become an internationally accepted process with lots of "Big Guy" adherents so it belongs on a piece like a UFX+ with it's otherwise swiss army knife approach to sound recording. Anyway, it's a great video. Thank you for posting it.
@jayrillabeats2059
2 жыл бұрын
They just released a new dante product itz like 2 grand
@who_is_dis
8 ай бұрын
Kinda wish they would go to USBC just for future proofing sake. There's also none of that "oops wrong way" bs either
@Zarabozo
Жыл бұрын
4:38 - It's not a misconception. I have two Focusrite Clarets 8pre, except one is thunderbolt 2 and the other one is USB 2. There's something in the protocol or in the way thunderbolt is wired directly into the CPU lanes, I don't know what it is - but the round trip is considerably lower via thunderbolt with these interfaces with near zero latency at 96 KHz, without problems. Sadly, I now need to let the thunderbolt interface go, as it no longer works with my new PC with thunderbolt 4, no matter what adapter or hub I try. I'm thinking of switching to RME, but having 24 channels with pres included is going to cost around 4k or 5k with RME, compared to 2k my Clarett 8preX with two Clarett Octopres costed me. So... I'm really trying to avoid the switch, looking for solutions.
@bassyey
4 ай бұрын
There are USB ports directly wired to the CPU too. The motherboard tells which ones are.
@poissonpuerile8897
10 күн бұрын
@@bassyey Not true. There are just USB ports on hubs with no devices connected to the other ports. No USB has or can have direct memory access like thunderbolt.
@ProAudioIQ
Жыл бұрын
I really appreciate the info in this video. Thank you! Also the comments from @Mtaalas below add some additional info that is really important and needed to round out the conversation. I run a 7.1.2 Atmos system via thunderbolt to my Mac book pro but I have used my interface for 21 simultaneous mics being recorded in large concert recording. My interface is also Dante enabled which is how we passed 21 channels from the stage to front of house position simply over ethernet cable. It really does just come down to what your needs are and getting a device that meets those and possibly provides a little room for occasional sessions needing larger simultaneous input
@PacifierMusic
Жыл бұрын
Thunderbolt has always be rock solid for me on MOTU. Always going to use a Mac for DAW so it just makes sense to stick with Thunderbolt.
@sblowes
Ай бұрын
Good call! Because Thunderbolt is far superior to USB, because it doesn’t tax the CPU.
@markgalbraith4655
2 жыл бұрын
thank you for making this easy to understand for us noobs that are still learning and wonder where to go when upgrading...keep up the great content 👍
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Glad to help! Thanks for watching, Mark!
@AntoniŚledziewski-i9s
5 ай бұрын
Lol, it's basically material from the RME channel about USB...
@lilsafmusic
Жыл бұрын
One reason to consider an Apollo's interface for latency is for the loopback. If you monitor your mic through loopback (obs streaming), there is noticeable latency.
@Mr.Plutonium
Жыл бұрын
RME has loopback and Totalmix is AMAZING. Apollo is sometimes terrible on PC.
@lilsafmusic
Жыл бұрын
@@Mr.Plutonium I'm not sure if it's better than Apollo's considering it's thunder bolt.
@Mr.Plutonium
Жыл бұрын
@@lilsafmusic Thunderbolt has nothing to do with quality, just quantity. With good drivers, USB 2.0 will deliver no difference.
@omicron-prsnl9806
2 жыл бұрын
1:34 USB 4 provides 40Gb/s, not 20Gb/s. The version of USB that provides 20Gb/s is USB 3.2 Gen2x2. (I know, the naming scheme is terrible. It hurts me too.)
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the correction!
@mdexterc2894
2 жыл бұрын
USB 4 is already being adopted, making thunderbolt mostly obsolete now
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
It will be interesting to see how it plays out!
@NexuJin
2 жыл бұрын
Not just obsolete, but also confusing for consumers that aren't well versed in various standards. TB is kinda becoming the next Firewire.
@eman0828
2 жыл бұрын
Maybe for the home studio or project studio market but definitely not the Professional Commercial market. Thunderbolt is an external PCIE connection as it doesn't get any better than that given that Protools HDX has the lowest latency in the industry with PCIE. Thunderbolt gotten pretty close. The HDX cards perform around 0.7 ms. Thunderbolt is a pro level studio connection esp for large scale deployments. USB can only handle a limited number of i/O.
@pandawithanorange
Жыл бұрын
Yep, just like USB micro B is obsolete and we haven't seen any devices ship with one since 2014. Oh wait...
@tronam
Ай бұрын
I just built a $4K PC and none of the high end motherboards featured USB4. The spec was announced in 2019. Adoption has been pathetically slow.
@kashdro85
2 жыл бұрын
I used to use a Baby Face FS and the drivers are fantastic. The latency is imperceptible as well and tons of headroom along with zero noise. My thunderbolt Apollo provides all of these things, minus the superior drivers but, allows for live tracking with plugins. RME is absolutely top notch and I will definitely be picking up a converter of some sort in the future if my setup and work flow expands. Thanks for the video!
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Akash! Glad you liked the video!
@MaximusWhyman
2 жыл бұрын
I traded in my Apollo X4 for RME Babyface. Not having to use a power source makes the Babyface a better choice for me. To much bloat with The Apollo.
@v3zMedia
2 жыл бұрын
@@MaximusWhyman where did you make this trade? I'm looking to offload my X4 as well?
@MaximusWhyman
2 жыл бұрын
@@v3zMedia Long & Mquade in Canada.
@v3zMedia
2 жыл бұрын
@@MaximusWhyman Aww dang I'm in the U.S. we don’t have many places that do good trades. They'll try to give me $700 for it at best in a store which ain't happening. 😆
@whaleguy
2 жыл бұрын
Latency on effected audio is the reason I still use an old Line 6 UX2. It is one of the cheapest interfaces with onboard effects, so I can plug in my guitar directly and use the Pod Farm software to load up a nice tone without needing to open my DAW at all. This way, I can record a clean DI and still hear whatever tone I want to hear and play accordingly. Best of both worlds. I firmly believe onboard FX is the way to go. They don't need to be great, just good enough to get you through the recording process. That said, I still use Pod Farm on many projects, so even so called outdated software still has its place.
@freyafoxmusic
2 жыл бұрын
That’s a solid ass card
@mkaudiostuff
Жыл бұрын
yes sir! finally someone nailed it ... except RME with its own video! this thunderbolt advertising has been driving people nuts for years now. running a RME Fireface UFX II via USB 2 by the way :-) roundtrip latency much under 3 ms if I want to :-) nice job dude! love from germany!
@repasiv
2 жыл бұрын
Reason 1: it doesn't matter
@PAULPINBALL
2 жыл бұрын
Always fantastic with precise explaining in your videos, you’d make a great teacher, very pragmatic!
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks, Paul! I appreciate that and I'm glad you like the videos!
@PAULPINBALL
2 жыл бұрын
@@AudioUniversity you’re welcome, they’re very well done and I hope sweetwater keeps hiring you to do their videos too!
@dewaadrian
2 жыл бұрын
this is why I love this channel, informative, scientific, easy to understand, detailed, and helpful. Thanks, Kyle.
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Glad you enjoy it, Dewa! Thanks again!
@elijahmant2855
Жыл бұрын
Thanks for the video. I was pleased to come across it. Hearing for a very long time how great RME Audio interfaces are. And that I've been hearing for a long time how Great Thunderbolt is compared to most other popular connectivity. Your video was good to see, as I'm considering a USB interface upgrade from my trusted old : Muto 2408 mk3. I may even get a second hand RME.
@berndkiltz
2 жыл бұрын
Very well explained. Everyone should watch this so this thunderbolt nonsense (for audio) stops
@camilleyih8759
2 жыл бұрын
its really up your workflow. up to your budget and sessions.
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
That's right, camille!
@thefluomusicduo9830
7 ай бұрын
Great video! Thank you for sharing such informative stuff!
@sandwich-breath
2 жыл бұрын
Excellent tutorial on some of the nuts and bolts behind the scenes. I’ve never been happier since I realized these trivialities have nothing to do with making music, and are only convenient distractions from productivity.
@pauldionne2884
2 жыл бұрын
Great video. Went from Firewire to USB for the same reasons.
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Nice. Thanks for sharing, Paul!
@ABcde-v8p
Жыл бұрын
Thanks, that is a comprehensive summary. However my experiences with USB for audio are quite different. For me USB is problems and usually audio errors. I have to use it since they stopped mounting FW sockets on laptops. FW was far more reliable - rock solid recording. I`ve been using MOTU UltraLite hybrid mk3. I have to buy a thunderbolt laptop and try to use FW-to-Thunder adapters to see if that works, as the current USB situation on my laptop makes the interface unreliable.
@valdir7426
11 ай бұрын
I can confirm it works perfectly fine on a modern mac with thunderbolt 3; but the easiest and cheapest way is to use two dongles (thunderbolt 3 to thunderbolt 2 then thunderbolt 2 to firewire); those are the official apple dongle and will set you less than 100 eurodollars. I have the FW only version which is officially not supported anymore but the two interfaces share the same driver. Only issue I have is I can't put the computer to sleep when the interface is on or I get a kernel panic.
@steven_porter
2 жыл бұрын
As a happy UFX II user I wholeheartedly agree. It's by far the most stable, versatile, and reliable interface I've ever worked with.
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Nice! Thanks, Steven. Couldn't agree more. I've been very impressed so far.
@steven_porter
2 жыл бұрын
@@AudioUniversity thanks for the great video! Have you used DigiCheck much? I just set up 5.1 surround this week and I'm finding the surround meter and other tools extremely useful for calibrating and setting up routing.
@emmomartins5383
2 жыл бұрын
@@AudioUniversity are you sure there is no dsp in FF UCXII? In the manual it says it does. If not, how does it work then?
@Byron101_
2 жыл бұрын
INFO: Why do many manufacturers not produce interfaces that use the USB 3.0 protocol? Bandwidth: Firstly, although USB 3.0 offers greater bandwidth than USB 2.0, for these devices it will deliver no round trip latency benefits over USB 2.0. This is due to the architecture of the host computer driver stack and its handling of USB audio data. The stack schedules data transfers to and from audio drivers at millisecond frame intervals which means that, no matter how fast the data moves over the USB bus, this defines the limit on minimum latency achievable. Useful Analogy: A good analogy is to think of it as a drainpipe and a tennis ball. The tennis ball is the data, and the width of the pipe signifies available bandwidth. With the drainpipe set at the same angle, letting go of the ball at the top of the drainpipe will see it arrive at the bottom in a given amount of time. That's your latency, the time it takes to go from end to end. In terms of analogy, USB 3.0 offers a much wider pipe. This means that it could allow a greater number of tennis balls (more data) to travel down the pipe, but the balls would not travel down the pipe any faster- there is no latency improvement. This is the same when comparing USB 3.0 and USB 2.0 in terms of the way they transfer audio data. This doesn't mean the higher bandwidth offered by USB 3.0 does not benefit some situations, e.g., for hard drive transfer times it makes a huge difference. However, for our largest channel count USB audio interface, such as the bigger RME or Scarlett 18i20 e.g, USB 2.0 provides more than enough bandwidth to deliver 18 channels of audio inputs and 20 channels of audio outputs simultaneously! Backward Compatibility: Many computers still come with USB 2.0 ports as well as USB 3.0, and many users still work on systems that have no USB 3.0 connectivity at all. USB 2.0 devices work without any issue on USB 3.0 ports, however, we can't say the same for USB 3.0 devices on USB 2.0 ports. With the question about backwards compatibility, combined with no real benefits to round-trip latency performance, the USB 2.0 protocol is still the most efficient technology for professional multichannel recording for the channel counts our USB devices provide. Thank you.
@BSnicks
Жыл бұрын
I use the DAW as an effects processor for live performance. The Baby Face Pro FS with USB2 has a round trip latency of 22.3 ms. My Quantum 26x26 thunderbolt has a roundtrip latency of only 1.52 ms. So, I don't see the reason in not using the thunderbolt interface. The only problem many people may run into is the thunderbolt cable. You MUST use an ACTIVE thunderbolt cable. They are usually pricey, from $60 and above. I got my 2 meter 'active' thunderbolt 4 cable for $23 from Amazon. There are unlimited VST plugins out there. So this solution is much better and cheaper than buying an Eventide H9000 or a Lexicon PCM92. In response to the title. I will never go back. All my USB2 devices will be sold or given away. My Baby Face Pro FS was pricey but good I thought. Until I found the Quantum 26x26, which is better and cheaper with or without a $100 active cable.
@dennvetta5480
11 ай бұрын
Agreed, I bought a Presonus Quantum 26x26 for $400 on eBay. Using thunderbolt 3. Why would I "switch back" to 2008 technology ? My latency problems are gone.
@TheTruthKiwi
2 жыл бұрын
Exceptionally well presented and explained. Bravo
@peterpaolini
2 жыл бұрын
Just amazing. That is your explanation and reason for staying with Usb
@KGTv123
Жыл бұрын
Awesome video. I never knew that the transfer speeds were the same
@AudioUniversity
Жыл бұрын
Thunderbolt has faster transfer speeds with more bandwidth. It just matters less for small channel counts of audio.
@jigsound
2 жыл бұрын
I've been thinking about the bandwith thing with USB2 for years. 🤔 Thanks for the to-the-point illustrations! 🙌 And you also got me interested in RME products 😁 - Eero
@L.Scott_Music
2 жыл бұрын
Even if the bandwidth isn't full used USB3.0 does have the advantage of greater power delivery which can be valuable when running several mics with phantom power or running on board DSP. USB 3.0 is as ubiquitous as 2.0 and I feel like any modern interface should design to that standard as a minimum. I feel like 2.0 will go away in time like 1.0 did. Mostly to just have room for the ports. (yes, I know it's backward compatible to 2.0). That said, I still use a USB 2.0 interface with six channels. I'll be moving up to a USB 3.0, 22-channel interface soon.
@lance134679
Жыл бұрын
I'll probably stick with my PCIe card as long as I can, though I notice that less places are selling them. I've been using an RME HDSPe AIO Pro for about a decade now and it's been very reliable and capable of low-latency when necessary, probably lower than the lowest possible latency of USB.
@hypnoz7871
Жыл бұрын
When measured, nearly all PCIe card suck in latency compared to asio usb. You're lucky to have one of the few expection with the model you have. RME drivers are on a different level.
@ET2carbon
9 ай бұрын
@@hypnoz7871please elaborate
@ritchozBEATS
2 жыл бұрын
M1 ALL THE WAY... RME thanks mate. 😊 x
@andivax
Жыл бұрын
Great video! If you are on AMD you can experience troubles with thunderbolt. RME is great interfaces but effects are crappy in comparison with UAD.
@AudioUniversity
Жыл бұрын
I am using AMD. I wonder if that contributes to my problems with Thunderbolt on my PC. Thanks. The RME effects work well for tracking. I agree that UA plugins are premium quality, but they are also much more expensive and processor-intensive. So it’s not really a one-to-one comparison.
@noreaction1
2 жыл бұрын
My next interface will be the focusrite dante enabled red 16line. It’s thunderbolt. I don’t know if there are any usb interfaces that offer dante compatibility at that high of I/O
@JoBu133
2 жыл бұрын
Check the RME Digiface Dante
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Dante is an amazing technology! Nice!
@peterbrusch1493
Жыл бұрын
Perfectly explained. Thank You!
@AudioUniversity
Жыл бұрын
Glad you enjoyed it!
@peterbrusch1493
Жыл бұрын
@@AudioUniversity I did! 👍
@aniruddhasitar
2 жыл бұрын
Great 👍 i can relate with the bus speed of a computer it is most important, doesn't matter how much RAM you put in your computer if the bus speed is less RAM cannot speedup. 👍👍
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for watching and leaving your comment!
@kenabi
2 жыл бұрын
i'm just over here still using firewire.
@mcdjchandler
11 ай бұрын
Very interesting. I've had many interfaces over the years, firewire (x 3) USB ( x 2) PCI (x 2) and my little Thunderbolt 2 Zoom interface has very similar low latency to my very old and expensive PCI MIX hardware from Pro Tools 5 (from the early 2000s G4 days). I've always had issues with latency on USB, and to a lesser extent, firewire. Thunderbolt and the very old PCI stuff wins for low latency, in my experience.
@valdir7426
11 ай бұрын
you can't beat PCI for latency certainly; and thunderbolt gives you pretty much direct PCI access so it's virtually identical. Firewire was still a bit better than USB though.
@ET2carbon
9 ай бұрын
That's what I'm saying. PCIe-424 MOTU to FOUR 2408mk3 rackmounts for 32 balanced I/O analog TRS channels. 96k 24bit all day. Still killing it. Hackintosh build on a 768GB RAM twin i7 CPU server.
@sartoriusrock
2 жыл бұрын
I thought I remember learning from _somewhere_ that Thunderbolt was, indeed a "highway with a faster speed limit," to use your analogy. This source claimed that, due to an inefficiency with how USB performs data transfer (error checking algorithm, maybe?), there is a bottleneck when it comes to latency in USB, even with low channel counts, and such a bottleneck was not present (or at least greatly reduced) in Thunderbolt. Anyone who knows more than me, feel free to let me know if I'm totally off-base. I'll admit that this presumption may be a desire to satiate my confirmation bias, as I dropped $2500 on a used Focusrite Red 8Pre (a Thunderbolt 2.0 interface)
@eman0828
2 жыл бұрын
You get lower latency and less load on the CPU when you use thunderbolt. Thunderbolt is really an external PCIE connection. Most high end professional studios use anything but USB. Thunderbolt, Digilink is pretty much the industry standard in commercial facilities, along with Dante, AVB and MADI that uses a lot i/O. USB has a limitation on i/O and performance which is why you rarely see USB ports on high end converters.
@ivolol
2 жыл бұрын
What's the limitation?
@eman0828
2 жыл бұрын
@@ivolol when was the last time you worked on an SSL nor Neve Console? Perhaps using a ton of outboard or doing live sound?
@petegaslondon
Жыл бұрын
@@eman0828 That doesn't really answer the guys question ;) That said, I tend to agree- my understanding is there's a bit of unavoidable latency with the way USB works, and I'd REALLY like near-instant monitoring in the headphones, which is why I'm hanging out for Thunderbolt for my next Motherboard (come ON AMD pick it up will ya!) (ok I'm sure RME's drivers do just great & I sure wouldn't turn my nose up at that little box.. But having had to deal with echoey lonng monitor latencies, I'd like everything as snappy as possible, thanks! Glenn Frickers gone DANTE, but for me thats a tad overkill ;) )
@dubmaverick69
Жыл бұрын
You don't see USB ports on high end converters cause no wants to spend the money to write drivers for it and get tons of emails about things are not working, that is why they all have AES, ADAT. The RME PCIE AES card is standard but there is no reason not to have the RME UCX II, you get a lot of connectivity, its portable and its nice addition to any studio and if you looking to control Eurorack it has DC coupled outputs, also if you are using Midi, you will get incredible timing cause they writing the driver, they have it down, now if Burl could team up with RME that would be a game changer.
@eman0828
Жыл бұрын
@@dubmaverick69 Lol RME AES is NOT a standard. That would be Thunderbolt and AVID HDX. RME market share in the US is rather small since the UA Apollo out sells them around the world. Lynx Auora, Apogee Symphony i/O and AVID dominates the high end commercial studio market. MOTU and Focusrite network audio interfaces are also found in high facilities.
@PurpleMusicProductions
2 жыл бұрын
I have this exact interface and it is indeed a beast.
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Nice! I'm loving it! The Babyface Pro FS is great, too!
@PurpleMusicProductions
2 жыл бұрын
@@AudioUniversity oh man I was looking at that one too for mobile and laptop solutions. So you do like that one? I swear I did not know what I was NOT hearing until I went to RME. It's like someone took a blanket off my music.
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
I think the Fireface UCX II and Babyface Pro FS are excellent!
@obshaky
8 ай бұрын
Well it gets more complex. USB is yet another abstraction layer and latency will depend on which devices it is sharing physical ports. Some motherboards offer usb ports straight to a PCIe lane and it aint Thunderbolt, which btw, it is simply called USB4 in its non-propietary form. For Windows there are motherboards like the AsRock LiveMixer that has such port that not only connects straight to a PCIe lane but also isolates the connection from the other stuff connected to the computer. Pair that with a decent cable and hardwarewise you are good.
@christopherclarke3022
2 жыл бұрын
A nice little ad for RME they will be happy.
@delvenhamric1200
2 жыл бұрын
I bought into Thunderbolt because of Universal Audio and had a custom built Windows system built for this interface! Unfortunately, UA dropped support for Windows and leaves me with a dead end expensive audio interface. Thunderbolt 4 may have added extra support, but in the process broke backwards compatibility! Thus rendering Thunderbolt the Betamax of the audio interface! Oh well, you win some and you loose some. 🤪
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
You may still be able to sell it to a Mac OS user! I've been considering doing that with my Apollo Twin. A similar thing happened to me.
@electricwhiterabbit
2 жыл бұрын
Why do they still show that UA supports Windows on their site and has drivers for Windows Thunderbolt hardware?
@delvenhamric1200
2 жыл бұрын
@@electricwhiterabbit Yea, your right, they do kind of support Windows. My desktop does work, but I have tried 3 different laptops and couldn't get any of them to work. Also, last time I looked, they don't Support Thunderbolt 4 on Windows! Yes, they do support Windows, kind of!
@electricwhiterabbit
2 жыл бұрын
@@delvenhamric1200 I thought those interfaces are only Thunderbolt 3?
@delvenhamric1200
2 жыл бұрын
@@electricwhiterabbit Yes, but try and find a Windows laptop that has Thunderbolt 3! The last one that I just got was a 6 year old refurbished laptop. It came with Thunderbolt 3 and saw my Apollo, but wouldn't work! Just saying, confirm that it will work before you waste your time and money!
@cjrhen9279
2 жыл бұрын
I found once you have a serious CPU at some point drivers and connection may be the bottleneck. I stick with thunderbolt since it's really just a pcie lane so i can monitor what's in my daw directly including processing plugins. That said, i have also have a USB 2 interface for when i only need quick audio not my whole recording rig. Cool video, you are slowly talking me into rme products too!
@curtisburns
2 жыл бұрын
I had a horrible latency issue using a USB interface plugged into the USB-A ports of a 2018 MAC Mini. The only workaround I could find was to buy a Thunderbolt dock with a USB-C port and plug my Interface into that.
@valdir7426
11 ай бұрын
my old trusty ultralite mk3 still uses firewire and the latency is better than on the latest mk5 model that uses usb. I get 7 ms RTL vs 11 at 128 samples / 48k . Higher than 10 ms latency begins to be quite noticeable. With a powerful computer you can get away with 64/128 samples; maybe 256 for heavy sessions but hardly less. Don't kow how RME fares but probably close to my MOTU. FW and thunderbolt certainly have an advantage latency wise; partly due to the fact they use direct memory access I believe.
@RasberrySkittle
7 ай бұрын
Filling out the USB2 sample rate of 480 MB/s means the audio will have a latency of 1 second. That's a lot of latency. Recording only one channel at 9 MB/s still results in a latency of 1/53 second = approximately 2 milliseconds. With 10 channels recording at similar ludicrous hi-fi we have 1/5 of a second latency. That's quite noticeable. But by recording 10 channels at a humbler 44hz/s you land at 4 milliseconds latency. Just a tiny bit noticeable, and you gotta account for some additional processing latency with the driver and all. With thunderbolt? The only noticeable latency is caused by your computer and software's processing time.
@mediacenter3174
2 жыл бұрын
Thunderbolt is USB 4, USB 4 is the future,
@MadelnMachines
11 ай бұрын
If this is true why do thunderbolt audio interfaces achieve lower latency figures than usb? RME's thunderbolt capable interfaces and presonus 2626 all come in a few ms lower in terms of round trip latency. There must be a reason for it. The 2626 can achieve around 2ms RTL at 32 buffer and the UFX+ around 2.5ms. RMEs usb interfaces seem to achieve more like 5-6ms at the same bugger size.
@sblowes
5 ай бұрын
FireWire and Thunderbolt have lower latency than USB because of the way they’re processed on the computer-side. USB is abstracted up a layer and taxes the CPU in a way t’bolt and FireWire don’t, because they’re essentially external extensions of the PCI bus on the motherboard.
@tronam
Ай бұрын
This is fundamentally true, but driver quality can compensate for this as demonstrated by RME.
@sblowes
Ай бұрын
@@tronamIt’s better than the competition, sure, but no matter how good their driver is, it can’t account for other devices that can cause dropouts on the USB bus or dropping samples when the CPU get’s pushed too hard. T’bolt and FireWire are isolated on the PCI bus. It’s why security vulnerabilities with FireWire and Thunderbolt and can’t be fixed in software, because they’re bypassing an entire layer of abstraction. It’s only important if guaranteeing a recording without dropped frames is important.
@MovielikeCinema
2 жыл бұрын
I have just one thunderbolt port on my windows laptop. If I want to connect anything thunderbolt, it has to be connect on that left port. So yes, USB is more widespread.
@bryanharrison3889
Жыл бұрын
The fireface ucx II is a technological marvel. ONe of the best interfaces to ever be conceived. And, considering what it does, its actually quite reasonably priced.
@yagizdolgun
2 жыл бұрын
A small correction. USB 4 provides 40 Gbps as well.
@theocorfiatis8456
10 ай бұрын
Thanks for your opinions. I've used many different Audio interfaces and computers over the past 25 years and from experience found USB 2.0 to be by far the most laggy and with the most dropouts. I disagree with your analysis based on many years of experience. There are many factors which determine how efficient and stable Audio interfaces are on a particular computer, and they are not just related to bandwidth over a USB port. The most efficient and stable I owned was an RME AES card plugged into a PCIe slot in a Windows 7 PC. It left USB 2.0 for dead in every respect, including latency, dropouts, overall system stability and the sheer number of tracks and plugins I could run on a moderately spec'd PC was perfect for doing large mixes. Those interfaces all use DMA which bypasses a lot of the interrupts caused by other system resources such as USB. Those other resources can drastically degrade audio performance, like having an SSD plugged into another USB port close to the one the Audio interface uses, which can drag down the bandwidth of the Audio interface quite drastically resulting in dropouts. Using MIDI over USB could also cause dropouts, if there is a lot of MIDI data over one USB 2.0 port, which happens to be on the same USB controller as the Audio interface. Thunderbolt 3, which I use now, bypasses the USB SSD drives, and I get excellent stability and no dropouts. I can understand why you oversimplified the explanation of why USB 2.0 is good for Audio. At face value you are correct, but in reality, there are always other factors which contribute to real-time system stability. When I started using computers to record, plugins used to have a static UI, with a few sliders on them, and were very efficient in terms of graphics. Nowadays many of the top brands of plugins have complex interactive graphical interfaces (which I love), displaying all sorts of real time information. This fact makes it mandatory to have a moderately well spec'd graphics card so that you don't get lots of audio dropouts, because the graphics card takes away real time processing power from the CPU. I discovered this the hard way when I got a Mac Mini (late 2018) which has a very decent i7 CPU but extremely low spec'd on-board graphics chip. Despite the good CPU performance, the computer was unusable for serious mixing, because the CPU spent most of its valuable clock cycles processing the UI data from the plugins I was using, and of course USB ports have lower priority than Graphics, because Graphics uses DMA, but so does Thunderbolt. The Audio interface I am using on it is an RME Babyface pro FS, which as you know uses USB. So I added a moderately powerful external GPU though TB-3, and all of a sudden, I had stable and very usable Audio without dropouts. I've since relegated that computer to the recording room and use a much higher spec'd machine for mixing (with a TB-3 interface) . All things being equal, yes RME make amazingly good interfaces, with excellent drivers, which I would recommend to anyone without a second thought. USB 2.0 should have tons of bandwidth for multiple audio channels, and it does if you have say 50 mono tracks in a DAW without plugins, and there are no other devices attached to other USB ports. But in reality, you can't really make music unless you have some good plugins and SSD drives for your samples and backups and Audio and all your extraneous system apps have been pruned right down while you are recording. Ok, maybe that was hasty, because if you have a room full of analogue hardware you can render each track to your daw, without using any plugins at all. But how many of us have a hundred thousand dollars to get all those magical analogue boxes? I've never met a real working musician who can afford this stuff, so I guess it's plugins for most of us, and so that's why I'm making this point that just looking at USB bandwidth alone is just as impractical as looking at CPU speed. Neither of these metrics give you an idea of whether a computer can produce stable audio.
@budiaplit
5 ай бұрын
Thunderbolt direct to CPU because use PCIe, USB need passing the chipset first. Thunderbolt better latency because short chain to CPU rather than USB
@MadMaxwellP216
2 жыл бұрын
My takeaway from this has nothing to do with bandwidth, cuz yes 2.0 is fine, but rather that 2.0 is cheaper to implement & keeps costs down for RME & hopefully the end user
@vigilant545
2 жыл бұрын
I love my old RME 9632 (PCI). Great drivers, still supported. USB 2.0 is enough, if you are using RME hardware/drivers for sure.
@vikingsofvintageaudio7470
Жыл бұрын
What a great video, thanks!
@burgerbeatz6293
2 жыл бұрын
Great explanation regarding bandwidth! ucx1 with the new m1 mini is ridiculously fast with usb
@lastdaysguitar
2 жыл бұрын
I'm not sure if its my Focusrite interfaces or USB but I've had 2 interfaces with USB and they occasionally both lose sync and sound like crap, and I have to reconnect them to get them to sync. Never had that issue with Firewire.
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Hmm... I haven't had that issue. Thanks for sharing though, lastdaysguitar.
@lastdaysguitar
2 жыл бұрын
@@AudioUniversity I hope you never do, I know of others that have not hit this issue, but I've hit it with 2 different PC's and 2 different DAW HW - both Focusrite Scarletts... that might be the weak link but I just don't know.
@NexuJin
2 жыл бұрын
I have had issues with my Focusrite Scarlett 4i4 for a while. Those issues stopped happening after I followed Focusrite advice and stopped using the interface connected to an USB hub (regardless or they are powered). Instead, it's now directly connected to the laptop's USB root hub.
@lastdaysguitar
2 жыл бұрын
@@NexuJin I'm directly connected to the PC, no hub but yes that is good advice.
@pikeysrock
3 ай бұрын
If you use Mac and are running kernel extensions Apple is no longer going to be supporting this option for security issues. I just bought the RME Fireface and am having to return it.
@Narwaro
18 күн бұрын
The reason why USB3, Thunderbolt and Firewire are inherently better than USB2 for Audio interfaces is not bandwidth. Its because USB2 uses polling to get data. Thats means that the device can only sent data when requested, which is pure garbage for real-time applications like audio. Its also the reason why people kept using PS/2 keyboards for ages. USB3 also doesnt do that. Can you make it work for audio? Yeah, if you work on it for 20 years and spend billions you can make everything work. RME has these impressive figures because they 100% do the USB stack themselves in their interfaces. Most other manufacturers use readily available interface chips.
@simonkormendy849
2 жыл бұрын
I've used Usb 2.0, Usb 3.0, and Usb 3.1 connectivity, and in reality the data transfer speeds are nothing like the maximum speeds quoted by the manufacturers, the actual speeds are very much slower in practice.
@petegaslondon
Жыл бұрын
Yeah, thats why I'm going for the overkill of Thunderbolt on my next PC Like, I'm sure the RME's a perfectly nice box,with whizzy drivers but .. Too much exp with echoey lonng headphone latency
@ShaneMiller1967
2 жыл бұрын
Great tutorial .my set up in addition to the scarlet audio interface 6i6 gen 1 uses an outboard mixer for monitoring so I don't have the latency issues as I avoid monitoring from the DAW/interface
@petegaslondon
Жыл бұрын
I hear you, but theres times I'd sure LIKE to be able to monitor thru the box - I'm sure the RME's a perfectly nice box, but that cute new socket's just TOO tempting,...
@Subjective_JoshNelson
Жыл бұрын
Hey. Kyle - great explanation as I had fallen into the newb misunderstanding you highlight in this vid. This is the second vid of yours I've seen (I think it was a vid on the Apollo interfaces, but can't remember 100%) and you do a great job of explaining things for a layperson. I'm on the fence in looking at an Apollo Twin X DUO (now I know I don't need the "X", and could go with an Mkll or even earlier; if all other things are equal between the two?) and an RME Baby or other Face. I'm learning that with my Mac Studio M1 Max, I probably don't need the DSP in the Apollo. But I don't understand, yet, how not using an Apollo workflow and their Console software would impact the workflow with my Sphere LX mic (I don't think I can get the additional mic locker mics, in an expansion pack, that the DLX has, if I'm not using an Apollo interface?) It will be interesting to see if UA upgrades/hybrids the Apollo hardware, at NAMM '23 as some are speculating...
@Cull_Obsidian
2 жыл бұрын
This is a good video, if pretty obviously paid for. Also, it might help if RME chose product that isn’t out of stock pretty much everywhere 😅
@jvf6257
9 ай бұрын
The RME has DC coupled inputs? Know the outputs are DC coupled. Thx for the explanation
@alainjulot3490
10 ай бұрын
So, Steinberg ARX4 USB-C 3.1 is a boom!!!
@clicks59
2 жыл бұрын
Great video but I don’t see professional recording studios that use Mac Pro’s going to USB. USB is amazing. Even the earliest USB 2.0 interfaces (Focusrite 18i8 first gen) can easily handle multiple channels. Even using a modest PC. (i5, 8GB)
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks, TB Player! I'm interested to see where it goes in the next few years!
@error8418
2 жыл бұрын
For big commercial studios PCIe (RME cards, Pro Tools HD, ...) or network options (AVB, Dante, ...) are the way to go.
@aloisjolliet2760
2 жыл бұрын
A friend of mine (ADCSound from Switzerland) is a professional recording engineer for classical music and uses up to 80 channels, he uses a usb interface (Madiface XT). So yes, professional studios may also use USB, but i assume the very big one with fixed installations tend to have more complete/flexible solutions as mentioned by @error
@kentbyron7608
2 жыл бұрын
Bravo! I learned a lot. Great communication skills and nice speaking style. Thank you. You could sell fluff to a pomeranian! 😁Gratitude! ❤️🙏🏼
@AudioUniversity
2 жыл бұрын
Glad you found it helpful, Kent!
@Rumpa1
Жыл бұрын
I still ask the same question How to connect 2 to 3/4 thunderbolt Apollo twin duo 😢
@melomane01
Жыл бұрын
Very helpful. Thank you.
@AudioUniversity
Жыл бұрын
Glad to help, Eric! Thanks for watching.
@JoeDoig
2 жыл бұрын
Still using the Babyface original and as we know, RME drivers are solid.
@pirojfmifhghek566
Жыл бұрын
Now this is a really interesting and *valuable* video. I've been tempted by thunderbolt for a while, but I think most of it is due to my latent PTSD from the early USB days when it would drop signal all the time and crash pro tools. I used to cling to firewire interfaces for dear life because of that nonsense. Thankfully it seems like these were all just early adopter driver issues rather than actual issues with USB 2.0 itself. You just saved me from wasting hundreds on a thunderbolt interface and PCIe adapter. I know this is basically an ad specifically for RME, but I'm still going to consider drivers as a higher priority than signal bandwidth when researching devices in the future. That's solid stuff.
@AudioUniversity
Жыл бұрын
Glad to help! While RME’s drivers are known to be rock solid, I’ve also had good experiences with most other modern USB interfaces.
@ejonesss
2 жыл бұрын
another reason not to use thunderbolt is connection drops. i am on a 2018 mac mini that i requested from apple to leave mojave on because it is the last osx to support 32 bit. i have an owc 2tb envoy ex pro ssd that uses thunderbolt 3. every time i open the sound control panel on the os the drive disconnects and reconnects i get the alert that the drive was improperly disconnected. i upgraded to catalina thinking ok maybe since mojave was the last 32 bit by going 64 bit it would stop glitching. and it worked for a little while and soon it went back to disconnecting the drive. so now i think it is that it is thunderbolt 3 because a usb c/3.x spinning drive does not disconnect. so maybe your interfaces was disconnecting on you so you staying with usb ensures you will not lose your interface each time you open the sound control panel.
@jchase8223
2 жыл бұрын
I use a 2016 mac pro Laptop, and a 2019 Mac pro laptop. I use a thunderbolt connection for my audio interface and I use a thunderbolt connection to an external video card every single day. I have never once had a lost connection, not a one. In any case, I'm just implying that if anything it's the hard drive factor with the Thunderbolt connection, not just Thunderbolt by itself. I've had tons of issues with hard drives disconnecting(or having a problem initially connecting) with different Macs over the years, but they've all been either USB or Firewire for me. I've never owned a Thunderbolt hard drive. These days I always uncheck the "Put hard disks to sleep when possible" option on both battery and power adapter settings, and that has solved some issues. I know I use a laptop, but maybe mac mini has the option for power adapter, or energy saving settings? Just an FYI for troubleshooting info gathering.
@GeorgeValkov
Жыл бұрын
Can you please show what issues might arise when using Thunderbolt? I though any Thunderbolt 3 device would automatically fallback to USB 3, when the host does not support Thunderbolt? What is the actual latency with minimal processing?
Пікірлер: 513