Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Find topics on computers, studios and music-related hardware.
Smokey Joe
New Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:24 pm
Contact:

Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by Smokey Joe » Mon Jul 22, 2019 11:15 am

I am looking to upgrade my current audio interface at the same time as I am upgrading to Cubase 10 and need some recommendations.

My key criteria are:

- Very low latency
- High quality sound / high sample rates
- Appr. 6-8 line inputs, 48 v, midi connections
- Seamless integration with Cubase 10
- Additional software could be a plus

Looking forward to your recommendations

User avatar
Glenn
Junior Member
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 3:51 am
Location: Oslo, Norway
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by Glenn » Mon Jul 22, 2019 12:20 pm

what kinda of connections to your computer would you prefer to work with? and what do you have now?
Cubase 10.0.40 PRO, Windows 10 PRO 64bit build 1903, RME Hammerfall 96/52, Asus X-470 Mainboard 32GB ram, Samsung NVME M.2 PRO, Ryzen 2700x OC 4.2 ghz, 2x UAD-2 Quad, Benchmark DAC-1, Apogee AD16, Millenia 4 HV3D, SSL XLogic Alpha, Universal Audio LA 610, Focusrite ISA428, Avalon AD2022, Brauner Phantom, Peluso, Shure, Sennheiser EVO, AKG C414, Electro Voice RE-20 and JZ Blackhole then some

User avatar
strummer
Junior Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2018 7:20 am
Location: Safe European Home, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by strummer » Mon Jul 22, 2019 1:35 pm

Smokey Joe wrote:
Mon Jul 22, 2019 11:15 am
I am looking to upgrade my current audio interface at the same time as I am upgrading to Cubase 10 and need some recommendations.

My key criteria are:

- Very low latency
- High quality sound / high sample rates
- Appr. 6-8 line inputs, 48 v, midi connections
- Seamless integration with Cubase 10
- Additional software could be a plus

Looking forward to your recommendations
If you want seamless there is Steinbergs own UR824 and AXR4T, but The UR824 does not have midi, so Steinberg AXR4T.
If you are ok with stuff just working really really well I would suggest an RME, just pick one that has the connections you need.
Laptop Win 10, i7-4700MQ, 16 GB ram, SSD, Cubase pro 10, Steinberg UR824, 2 x Presonus Digimax D8, microphones:)

Smokey Joe
New Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by Smokey Joe » Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:11 pm

Glenn wrote:
Mon Jul 22, 2019 12:20 pm
what kinda of connections to your computer would you prefer to work with? and what do you have now?
I currently have firewire and USB 3. I could install a thunderbolt connection as well if it would make a significant difference.

skijumptoes
Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 9:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by skijumptoes » Mon Jul 22, 2019 2:27 pm

What kind of budget are you looking at? RME would be the obvious choice on low latency - but then at the bottom of the scale the Behringer UMC1820 is very good on a budget and also delivers what you need.

Then there's SOOO much inbetween lol.

If you're happy with your current interface but it lacks the number of inputs you require, then increasing inputs via ADAT may also be an option for you (If your interface supports it).

Also, as you mention high sample rates - just make sure the rest of your machine is setup for that too as the higher rates will kill your CPU and add additional storage requirements - so buy an interface that matches your true requirements, and if you're making use of the pre-amps ensure they are of good quality vs the sample rate.

User avatar
Glenn
Junior Member
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2010 3:51 am
Location: Oslo, Norway
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by Glenn » Mon Jul 22, 2019 10:08 pm

yes like earlier post suggests, very good advice. Your computer will in many ways dictate your latency.

For me I always will suggest RME, they have the best and most stable drivers. I use the same soundcard I bought 14 years ago. I can record with 0.7 ms input and 1,3 ms output. so if you do a lot of recordings you will have many happy musicians recording with a minimum of latency.

Solutions I haven't tried but looks very tempting most certainly must be the Universal Audio Apollo cards. As I already have UAD cards that would be a lock for my next device if my RME went down.

Also the Steinberg cards works very nicely, certainly much better then the Focusrite Scarlett boxes.
Cubase 10.0.40 PRO, Windows 10 PRO 64bit build 1903, RME Hammerfall 96/52, Asus X-470 Mainboard 32GB ram, Samsung NVME M.2 PRO, Ryzen 2700x OC 4.2 ghz, 2x UAD-2 Quad, Benchmark DAC-1, Apogee AD16, Millenia 4 HV3D, SSL XLogic Alpha, Universal Audio LA 610, Focusrite ISA428, Avalon AD2022, Brauner Phantom, Peluso, Shure, Sennheiser EVO, AKG C414, Electro Voice RE-20 and JZ Blackhole then some

-steve-
External Moderator
Posts: 9048
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:42 pm

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by -steve- » Mon Jul 22, 2019 10:13 pm

You might have a look at the Steinberg UR-RT4, it fulfills your minimum spec, integrates with Cubendo, and it's built like a tank.
independent manufacturer rep
cubase pro, nuendo, and dorico pro; latest versions
windows pro 10 | i7-3770k | ga-77x-ud5h | 32 Gb | UR-RT2 | k-mix audio interface
hp spectre x360 2018 | 16 Gb

Vital Few
Junior Member
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by Vital Few » Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:34 am

Prism Sound Titan with Dante. Best converters, best sound, loads of inputs. I have two of them and will never use anything else.
You won't find anything else that can compete with it. Some people will claim they are expensive, but to be quite frank - you get what you pay for. All other soundcard realy sound like crap, when you first have listened to a Prism Sound. In addition to that, it has direct monitoring. And the service from the factory. If you have any questions about your product, you can call them directly and they are very helpful. They take their customers seriously.
It his no MIDI but you can buy what ever you want for cheap money.
Cubase Pro 10, Dual Xeon E5-2670, 128 gigs of ram, Samsung EVO 860 1 TB primary, Samsung EVO 960 2 TB secondary, Komplete, Waves, Softube, a bunch of VSTi's, Prism Sound Titan.

skijumptoes
Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 9:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by skijumptoes » Tue Jul 23, 2019 9:47 am

Vital Few wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:34 am
Prism Sound Titan with Dante. Best converters, best sound, loads of inputs.
For most people that would be a final piece of the jigsaw, vast majority of people would be better advised to spend that kind of money elsewhere on instruments/mics/sound proofing/monitors that would add so much vs the minuscule improvements a 'Made in Britain' (Thats why it's expensive) interface would provide them - no matter how wonderful the sound is, you won't hear or truly benefit from it, unless you're putting quality in and the listening/performing environment is dead/neutral enough to hear and appreciate.

Not doubting the quality or crapping on it, of course, but there's so much before and after the interface that would provide way more significant improvements (In my opinion). I mean, who truly uses the vast dynamic range that such interfaces advertise? It's probably compressed afterwards in mixing too, and if not is a very specific market for people using well controlled rooms and more expensive recording equipment coming in.

Vital Few
Junior Member
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 1:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by Vital Few » Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:31 am

skijumptoes wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 9:47 am
Vital Few wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:34 am
Prism Sound Titan with Dante. Best converters, best sound, loads of inputs.
For most people that would be a final piece of the jigsaw, vast majority of people would be better advised to spend that kind of money elsewhere on instruments/mics/sound proofing/monitors that would add so much vs the minuscule improvements a 'Made in Britain' (Thats why it's expensive) interface would provide them - no matter how wonderful the sound is, you won't hear or truly benefit from it, unless you're putting quality in and the listening/performing environment is dead/neutral enough to hear and appreciate.

Not doubting the quality or crapping on it, of course, but there's so much before and after the interface that would provide way more significant improvements (In my opinion). I mean, who truly uses the vast dynamic range that such interfaces advertise? It's probably compressed afterwards in mixing too, and if not is a very specific market for people using well controlled rooms and more expensive recording equipment coming in.
I don't agree with you. You can hear the difference in the headphones. You get what you pay for, and there is without any doubt a clear difference between low-end and high-end gear. There is also a clear difference between a Beringer and ans SSL console. The converteres only have one competitor and those are the ones from DAD. If you want pro sound, you need to have prosound gear. I also use Neumann speakers, Neumann and DPA microphones because I can hear the difference. And I don't need an accoustic treated room for that.

The major problem today is, that same people think that there is no difference between high-end and low-end gear. I've been in the sound industry since 1986. I bought my first Emulator II second hand in 1988 and it was even more expensive than the Titan. Today, you can build a pro studio for less than 25.000 euros.

If you can't hear the difference, fine with me. In the end, if the user don't have a clue on what he/she is doing with the outboard, then a pro soundcard won't make much of a difference.
Cubase Pro 10, Dual Xeon E5-2670, 128 gigs of ram, Samsung EVO 860 1 TB primary, Samsung EVO 960 2 TB secondary, Komplete, Waves, Softube, a bunch of VSTi's, Prism Sound Titan.

skijumptoes
Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 9:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by skijumptoes » Tue Jul 23, 2019 12:11 pm

Unless you have the surrounding equipment you won't hear the difference to appreciate it - 30+ years experience should've taught you that. And i'd take a pretty smart guess that anyone asking for recommendations such as the OP would probably know what they want if they had such requirements and other equipment in place.

Like i said, no doubting it of it's quality, or knocking you and your choice. It's important that higher end gear exists to push the boundaries of what can be achieved and i'm sure it delivers you much joy.

However, for the many it's totally overkill unless your current interface is a weak point in the chain. Most people are shifting out their tunes to youtube/spotify/itunes where the small differences are either nullified or vastly outweighed by more important gear in the chain, room treatment being an obvious one, quality of instrument and mic being another.

An RME costs a fraction of the interface you've recommended, for example, and you'd be hard pushed to hear a difference that can be deemed universally 'better' if blind tested. As for 'Pro' sound, many people produce solely in the box nowadays (VSTi's etc) so the audio interface is not affecting the final render at all.

I'm really curious as to what you are plugging into it's inputs to utilise the dynamic range and class of converters to claim there's a 'clear' difference, as you've worked in the industry for so long, you must have plenty of productions out there - Could you share with us to demonstrate the quality you're getting please?
Last edited by skijumptoes on Tue Jul 23, 2019 2:32 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
strummer
Junior Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2018 7:20 am
Location: Safe European Home, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by strummer » Tue Jul 23, 2019 2:09 pm

Vital Few wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:34 am
Prism Sound Titan with Dante.
Awesome interface for sure :!:
However, and I am guessing here, I think the OP is looking for something a little less expensive. let's see...
Laptop Win 10, i7-4700MQ, 16 GB ram, SSD, Cubase pro 10, Steinberg UR824, 2 x Presonus Digimax D8, microphones:)

Smokey Joe
New Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by Smokey Joe » Wed Jul 24, 2019 8:40 am

Lots of good information so far. Thank you.

I really also would need some advice regarding the other part of my question - connection used.
As I stated I am using a PC with USB 2 / 3 connections and I have a firewire 400 too.
I could potentially also install a Thunderbolt card as well but some people say it can create problems with the PC.

Firewire is apparently much more stable for audio than USB but new cards using USB 3 are supposedly better.
For me I would like to be able to work as stated before with low latency and for example USB 2 apparently is not ideal (also considering if you want to be working with lower buffer sizes).

USB, Firewire or Thunderbolt?

skijumptoes
Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 9:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by skijumptoes » Wed Jul 24, 2019 11:23 am

Depends on budget really, Firewire is much better on lower end interfaces than USB as it's on it's own bus and requires less use of software/cpu time - If you're on Mac then i'd go firewire over USB for stability and latency reasons personally - but Firewire is also near obsolete now (But that means you can pick up some great gear for less money).

If you want to spend more money on a modern interface then Thunderbolt is best (Or PCI-E if you have it?), but if you're on a windows machine then USB is more compatible generally. Thunderbolt/Firewire is very much the choice of Mac users by default as the ports exist on all products.

USB interfaces you really need to check for reviews as to how good the driver is for low latency and reliability - this is why companies such as RME have such a stellar reputation, much of the work goes into the system driver.

What have you at the moment?, what OS are you using?, and what kind of budget are you looking at? There's so much out there to pick from but without some idea of where you are it's hard to recommend.

currentsound
Junior Member
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2012 11:16 am
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, California, USA
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by currentsound » Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:10 am

Smokey Joe wrote:
Mon Jul 22, 2019 11:15 am
My key criteria are:

- Very low latency
- High quality sound / high sample rates
- Appr. 6-8 line inputs, 48 v, midi connections
- Seamless integration with Cubase 10
- Additional software could be a plus
UR824
- Very low latency: YES but only for recording and not using 3rd party plugins while monitoring, not for midi as USB has more latency than firewire/thunderbolt
- High quality sound / high sample rates: YES. Best converters out the Steinberg interfaces except for their latest 32bit one which is way more expensive
- Appr. 6-8 line inputs, 48 v, midi connections Yes but USB to MIDI cable need as has no midi. USB to midi cables are cheap on amazon and ebay
- Seamless integration with Cubase 10 YES
- Additional software could be a plus Not really anything extra except a reverb and compressor plugin

My suggestion
Apollo Twin mk2 + ADAT Converter
- Very low latency: YES. Lower than the UR824 for everything if you can use and get the thunderbolt version (check compatibility) except for monitoring audio through Cubase but it has it's own mixer software for monitoring provided you don't need the extra sends from Cubase's control room and you get near zero latency monitoring for guitar amp sims and effects if you use it's own software along side Cubase but it's still pretty low from within Cubase anyway.
- High quality sound / high sample rates: YES
- Appr. 6-8 line inputs, 48 v, midi connections Come with two but 8 more can be added over Adat
- Seamless integration with Cubase 10 No. You need to use it's mixer when recording to get zero latency monitoring but... You get LOW latency monitoring inside Cubase AND you can use the DSP plugins included which will give you either low latency monitoring for guitars and basses inside Cubase as a plugin or you can use it's own software for near zero latency monitoring including monitoring through effects
- Additional software could be a plus Comes with a very nice selection of ultra low latency DSP plugins, plus a monitoring mixer

Extra pluses:
Sits on your desk
Has built in talkback
Has built in Monitor control and selection
Combines multiple devices into one unit which ends up saving money over time

Minuses:
More expensive after you add a good quality ADAT converter to it.

Or you can get both and use the UR824 as an ADAT converter to the UAD Twin Mk2. Then you get the extra inputs of the UR824 as an ADAT converter going to the Twin and if you need zero latency monitoring within Cubase for extra audio sends and to use the full control room functionality, you can swap to the UR824 for that session and monitor through the twin via ADAT to keep your hardware talkback and monitor controller working.



Other options
used Mr816.

- Very low latency: YES, lower than UR824 for midi and same as UR824 for audio but has one less ADAT input
- High quality sound / high sample rates: YES. Best converters out the Steinberg interfaces except for their latest 32bit one which is way more expensive
- Appr. 6-8 line inputs, 48 v, midi connections Yes but USB to MIDI cable need as has no midi. USB to midi cables are cheap on amazon and ebay
- Seamless integration with Cubase 10 YES
- Additional software could be a plus Not really anything extra except a reverb and compressor plugin

Or if you like the Apollo line there is also the UAD Apollo 8.

Or if you wanna go crazy and get the best one there is for Cubase, you can get their brand new interface. The Steinberg AXR4T 28 x 24 Thunderbolt Audio Interface. Ticks all of your boxes plus more but is probably overkill for you since it costs around $2800 and has 20 more inputs than you need lol.

Audient iD44 plus an external Dual channel digital spiff preamp or an 8 channel ADAT converter is a decent option too but lacks the DSP of the Apollo and lacks the Cubase integration.

Right now, the Steinberg interfaces are the only ones offering zero latency monitoring inside of your DAW.
Last edited by currentsound on Mon Jul 29, 2019 4:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
strummer
Junior Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2018 7:20 am
Location: Safe European Home, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by strummer » Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:19 am

Firewire is extremely rare these days, and as a long time user of USB 2.0 soundcards (RME, Steinberg UR series, Focusrite Scarlett, Tascam) I have no directly USB related problems to report since forever. I am with skijumptoes on the driver though, very important.

I think that we need your budget, and maybe what you have used in the past, to help further.
Laptop Win 10, i7-4700MQ, 16 GB ram, SSD, Cubase pro 10, Steinberg UR824, 2 x Presonus Digimax D8, microphones:)

currentsound
Junior Member
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2012 11:16 am
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, California, USA
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by currentsound » Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:25 am

strummer wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:19 am
Firewire is extremely rare these days, and as a long time user of USB 2.0 soundcards (RME, Steinberg UR series, Focusrite Scarlett, Tascam) I have no directly USB related problems to report since forever. I am with skijumptoes on the driver though, very important.

I think that we need your budget, and maybe what you have used in the past, to help further.
Usb still has higher latency than firewire for midi controllers and monitoring effects in the DAW and Apple's firewire to thunderbolt adapters allow firewire to still work on mac's and even new thunderbolt windows laptops.

USB is fine but if you are playing keyboards and want the lowest latency then thunderbolt or firewire is better as it will give you lower latency at the same sized sample rate to USB.

I think my Apogee Duet was around 27ms and the Firewire tascam I had was lower at around 21ms at the same buffer setting so I guess that's between a 3rd to a quarter lower latency. The Apogee seems fine though but if you want the lowest possible latency, firewire and thunderbolt interfaces are generally lower.

User avatar
strummer
Junior Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2018 7:20 am
Location: Safe European Home, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by strummer » Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:43 am

currentsound wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:25 am
strummer wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:19 am
Firewire is extremely rare these days, and as a long time user of USB 2.0 soundcards (RME, Steinberg UR series, Focusrite Scarlett, Tascam) I have no directly USB related problems to report since forever. I am with skijumptoes on the driver though, very important.

I think that we need your budget, and maybe what you have used in the past, to help further.
Usb still has higher latency than firewire for midi controllers and monitoring effects in the DAW and Apple's firewire to thunderbolt adapters allow firewire to still work on mac's and even new thunderbolt windows laptops.

USB is fine but if you are playing keyboards and want the lowest latency then thunderbolt or firewire is better as it will give you lower latency at the same sized sample rate to USB.

I think my Apogee Duet was around 27ms and the Firewire tascam I had was lower at around 21ms at the same buffer setting so I guess that's between a 3rd to a quarter lower latency. The Apogee seems fine though but if you want the lowest possible latency, firewire and thunderbolt interfaces are generally lower.
Not that it ever has bothered me, but you definitely have a point about latency.
And since the OP is on PC without thunderbolt, I'd say the obvious choice would then be RME :) Both fw and usb and awesome drivers.
Laptop Win 10, i7-4700MQ, 16 GB ram, SSD, Cubase pro 10, Steinberg UR824, 2 x Presonus Digimax D8, microphones:)

skijumptoes
Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 9:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by skijumptoes » Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:42 am

strummer wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:43 am
And since the OP is on PC without thunderbolt, I'd say the obvious choice would then be RME :) Both fw and usb and awesome drivers.
We've not had the "Within a $300 budget" reply yet! lol :)

skijumptoes
Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 9:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by skijumptoes » Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

currentsound wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 7:10 am
Or if you like the Apollo line there is also the UAD Apollo 8.
What's with the Apollo Solo, seems the same as the Twin but with less onboard DSP at a cheaper price - is that right?

I've often thought of adding an ADAT rack to my setup (Just a cheapy Behringer ADA8200 or Focusrite Octopre), but then i read reports on how ADAT can add latency, cause sync issues and sometimes appear as separate audio interfaces in windows OS, so i've held off. But then, the other part of me thinks why do those desktop Apollo's get such rave reviews if ADAT can be troublesome? It's very hard to cut through the nonsense online - OR, is it very subjective as to what is hosting the ADAT connection?

User avatar
strummer
Junior Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2018 7:20 am
Location: Safe European Home, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by strummer » Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:04 am

skijumptoes wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am


I've often thought of adding an ADAT rack to my setup (Just a cheapy Behringer ADA8200 or Focusrite Octopre), but then i read reports on how ADAT can add latency, cause sync issues and sometimes appear as separate audio interfaces in windows OS, so i've held off. But then, the other part of me thinks why do those desktop Apollo's get such rave reviews if ADAT can be troublesome? It's very hard to cut through the nonsense online - OR, is it very subjective as to what is hosting the ADAT connection?
I love ADAT, Used to run an RME UCX with a Personus D8, now I have an UR824 with two D8, not a problem ever. Next up is a second UR824 to get 24 in and 16 ch out.
Laptop Win 10, i7-4700MQ, 16 GB ram, SSD, Cubase pro 10, Steinberg UR824, 2 x Presonus Digimax D8, microphones:)

skijumptoes
Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 9:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by skijumptoes » Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:56 am

What made you jump from the RME to Steinberg then, if already using ADAT? I presumed the RME would provide a better experience over an URxx.

Also, i thought you could only pair two interfaces on MacOS?

I'm seriously tempted by the RME Digiface and adding an ADA8200 to get started on a budget in the USB domain, as currently i'm running Focusrite Saffire 56 but at some point i'm gonna have to leave firewire but i need to run something alongside it to start with before committing to a new setup. I love the idea of those 4x ADATs, but then having ONLY a headphone out port is blowing my mind a bit - but i guess you come out of the outputs of the ADATs.

I just find it hard, based on previous experience with USB interfaces, that they can come near the stability and latency i get via Firewire - which is my main curiosity.

User avatar
strummer
Junior Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2018 7:20 am
Location: Safe European Home, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by strummer » Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:54 pm

skijumptoes wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:56 am
What made you jump from the RME to Steinberg then, if already using ADAT? I presumed the RME would provide a better experience over an URxx.

Also, i thought you could only pair two interfaces on MacOS?

I'm seriously tempted by the RME Digiface and adding an ADA8200 to get started on a budget in the USB domain, as currently i'm running Focusrite Saffire 56 but at some point i'm gonna have to leave firewire but i need to run something alongside it to start with before committing to a new setup. I love the idea of those 4x ADATs, but then having ONLY a headphone out port is blowing my mind a bit - but i guess you come out of the outputs of the ADATs.

I just find it hard, based on previous experience with USB interfaces, that they can come near the stability and latency i get via Firewire - which is my main curiosity.
I guess you are asking me:)
I needed more channels, the UCX has only one ADAT in and 2 mic inputs along with 6 line in and a Spdif, so it maxes otu at 18 inputs.
I am on Win, don't know about mac much, but using ADAT means there is only ever the one interface connected, the ADAT units (in my case D8:s) are set to clock sync with the soundcard and the soundcard just gets the optical signals in along with it's own analogue inputs.
Going from an RME to a UR824 meant a bit higher latency for the same setting, but as I record mostly with microphones and line (seldom midi) that is no problem, RME has a brilliant mixer (and direct monitor if you want it) but UR824 has direct monitor w/dsp, and it's inside Cubase:) Also, the RME mic preamps were perhaps a smidge better than the Yamahas, but not much, and now I have 8 mic in with that quality!
Control over the RME software does much more than the Steinberg version, and it has a slew of great functions. DSP is very good with reverb and echo, but then Steinberg has that too, and guitar amps!
Ask me again when I have 2 000 Euros to spare, and I'll probably say I just bought myself an RME UFX II, but for now I'm good with the UR824.

I wouldn't get a Digiface unless I had some decent preamps, the Babyface Pro is a much better choice imho, or an UCX. If you want the Digiface, you could get a UR824 to get 8 mic in and 8 ch out vi ADAT, that would sort it all:)
Laptop Win 10, i7-4700MQ, 16 GB ram, SSD, Cubase pro 10, Steinberg UR824, 2 x Presonus Digimax D8, microphones:)

skijumptoes
Member
Posts: 343
Joined: Tue May 07, 2019 9:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by skijumptoes » Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:20 pm

strummer wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:54 pm
I wouldn't get a Digiface unless I had some decent preamps, the Babyface Pro is a much better choice imho, or an UCX. If you want the Digiface, you could get a UR824 to get 8 mic in and 8 ch out vi ADAT, that would sort it all:)
Thanks for the reply, appreciate it. And i didn't realise those Steinberg interfaces had DSP controllable within Cubase - That's REALLY interested me. Seriously looking at the UR824 now - it looks a steal for what you get with the ADAT option too. Plus, i think i'm done with Mac for audio and perhaps should give USB a try - Apple just seem to want to grab you by the balls and squeeze. :)

One question, have you tried the pre-amps on your UR824 for mic'ing guitar amps? Sometimes i have to raise the gain on my focusrite (Around 75-80%) to get a good recording level if it's late at night. Do they get noisy when applying gain?

Edit: wow it's a good price too - https://www.andertons.co.uk/steinberg-u ... ro-9-45860

Cubase on it's own is 400+ - that's insane!

User avatar
strummer
Junior Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2018 7:20 am
Location: Safe European Home, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Recommendations needed for a new audio interface with Cubase 10

Post by strummer » Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:51 pm

skijumptoes wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:20 pm
strummer wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 8:54 pm
I wouldn't get a Digiface unless I had some decent preamps, the Babyface Pro is a much better choice imho, or an UCX. If you want the Digiface, you could get a UR824 to get 8 mic in and 8 ch out vi ADAT, that would sort it all:)
Thanks for the reply, appreciate it. And i didn't realise those Steinberg interfaces had DSP controllable within Cubase - That's REALLY interested me. Seriously looking at the UR824 now - it looks a steal for what you get with the ADAT option too. Plus, i think i'm done with Mac for audio and perhaps should give USB a try - Apple just seem to want to grab you by the balls and squeeze. :)

One question, have you tried the pre-amps on your UR824 for mic'ing guitar amps? Sometimes i have to raise the gain on my focusrite (Around 75-80%) to get a good recording level if it's late at night. Do they get noisy when applying gain?

Edit: wow it's a good price too - https://www.andertons.co.uk/steinberg-u ... ro-9-45860

Cubase on it's own is 400+ - that's insane!
Yes, as the preamps in the UR824 are the best I have right now I huse them for guitars, vocals, overheads and as much else as I can get away with. Now most of the bands I record kind of crank the *flower* out of everything, but some take it easy, and I also use ribbon mics for both electric guitar and overheads a lot (Bumblebee RM-5) and those are loooow on signal, so I often crank the gain. And no, not noisier than the RME:S in the UCX.
One thing about the DSP worth knowing is that is's just one channel with guitar amps, and all 8 (and I think ADAT A) inputs has the channel strip and reverb.
Laptop Win 10, i7-4700MQ, 16 GB ram, SSD, Cubase pro 10, Steinberg UR824, 2 x Presonus Digimax D8, microphones:)

Post Reply

Return to “Computer/Studio Hardware & Setup”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests