The fault is mine, for not reading specs thoroughly, not the Hi-Z input. Lesson learned.

Thanks.

Well, the Babyface Pro is a mobile bus-powered device.

I wouldn't describe it as a fault because many guitarists use the BBF Pro FS with its Instr input.
The problem here is IMHO that you are using such hot PUs.

My preference is to use more balanced PUs like Gibson Classic '57, which sound more organic (you hear more of the guitar sound) and to shape the sound with a pedal or within the virtual amp.

You still have the possibility to use a D/I box, which is a valid solution, not only a "workaround".
You confirmed it yourself: "On the mic input, connected with a DI i have no issues at all, whatever style i play, I have plenty headroom. "

There, I think you are possibly making a mistake by using a passive D/I box.
I wouldn't wonder if you have some treble loss.

I would get an active D/I box, which is recommended in your setup to avoid this treble loss.
https://www.thomann.de/de/palmer_pan_02.htm for only €66; that's really not too expensive.

Thanks.

A DI box is the proper way to get from jack guitar cable to XLR cable.

A DI box does more than just adapt the connector from TS (jack) to XLR.
It converts the unbalanced instrument signal to a balanced one, matches impedance,
and attenuates the signal to mic level.
It also suppresses ground loops and hum and protects the instrument from +48V phantom power.

No one could think there will be a user who complains the other way around. Using the XLR input instead of the jack socket should solve the problem by enabling the PAD in the input channel.
A DI box is the proper way to get from jack guitar cable to XLR cable.

If this is not sufficient for your guitar setup, then you have to
- work with the DI box like you did, which works or
- alternatively try another recording interface like 802 FS, UFX II or UFX III,
  which all support up to +21 dBu max input level on the Instr input.

> Was it like that before? one of the members told it was asked to be like this by forum members.

Sorry, I don't know. All that I can tell is that the devices follow the published specs; see the manual.

Thanks for the update, but this still doesn't give the data needed to identify the actual problem.

"Cheap passive DI" is not a product specification; brand and model are needed to evaluate the actual output impedance and level characteristics.

Also, your test method is not valid. Fingerstyle/light playing produces lower transient peaks than hard picking, palm-muted chugging, or hard attack on the low E string. If you want to find the real headroom limit of an input, you have to test with the technique that produces your highest peaks, not whichever technique happens not to clip.
And you need one setup/setting, not per play style, so that you have the full dynamic for your playing at any time without having to fear whether you come into clipping.

Please run one clean, defined test:
- DI box output (balanced) → Analog 1 IN via XLR
- Gain: 0 dB
- PAD: ON
- Play your hardest-hitting technique (pick attack, low E, palm-mute chugging)
- Read the peak level in TotalMix, in dBFS, peak meter, not RMS/average, since RMS hides exactly the transients that cause clipping.

Report back the actual peak dBFS value from this specific configuration. Without that number, no one can tell you whether you have a real headroom problem or whether the settings simply aren't targeted correctly.

Thanks.

on the mic input, connected with a DI i have no issues at all, whatever style i play, I have plenty headroom. But, my issue is with BFP DI absence of headroom, and, honestly, is it me, or did someone else noticed. How did they dealt with the issue within the interface mixer and hardware? Was it like that before? one of the members told it was asked to be like this by forum members.

"Cheap passive DI" is not a product specification; brand and model are needed to evaluate the actual output impedance and level characteristics.

Also, your test method is not valid. Fingerstyle/light playing produces lower transient peaks than hard picking, palm-muted chugging, or hard attack on the low E string. If you want to find the real headroom limit of an input, you have to test with the technique that produces your highest peaks, not whichever technique happens not to clip.
And you need one setup/setting, not per play style, so that you have the full dynamic for your playing at any time without having to fear whether you come into clipping.

Please run one clean, defined test:
- DI box output (balanced) → Analog 1 IN via XLR
- Gain: 0 dB
- PAD: ON
- Play your hardest-hitting technique (pick attack, low E, palm-mute chugging)
- Read the peak level in TotalMix, in dBFS, peak meter, not RMS/average, since RMS hides exactly the transients that cause clipping.

Report back the actual peak dBFS value from this specific configuration. Without that number, no one can tell you whether you have a real headroom problem or whether the settings simply aren't targeted correctly.

Thanks.

Did you try the input reference level +4dBu ?

It is still Hi-z input but the input gain stage is different.

Yes, my previous interface supported +20db input, versus the +13db of the BFP. The input clips at the +4db setting, not as much but it clips, I was considering using that option. But this an obvious downgrade of my signal path. I already contacted the seller. I have no more issues with the BFP.

BTW, every interface on this price bracket, or format, like the UltraLite, Symponhy Duet 3, Apollos have such limitation, it seems they are not targeting guitar players, with modern high gain pickups. The exceptions are very scarce.

It is still Hi-z input but the input gain stage is different.

Sorry, I do not understand the issue now with the passive D/I box.

You say with the passive D/I Box
a) "I am able to set adequate gain levels." What concrete gain levels on which analog input (1, 2, 3, 4)?
b) It "sounds conventional" with "limited headroom".
     What is the limitation? Please detail the metering; what average and peak levels do you see?

That you can set an adequate gain level and be limited with headroom sounds like a contradiction.
You have to deliver more details; see a) and b) to better explain what you mean, and to get a clue about what the problem is.

What passive D/I box do you use?

Please note three important points:

1. You should better use an active D/I box because a passive one will most likely impact higher frequencies of the signal
https://www.thomann.de/de/palmer_pan_02.htm €66

2. You need to connect the D/I Box to either Analog 1 or 2 IN, NOT (!!) 3+4, as 3+4 are limited to a max input level of +13 dBu at gain 0

3. You need to activate PAD on Analog 1 or 2 IN; otherwise, you won't get the max input level of +19 dBu!!!

I’m using a cheap passive DI on input 1, I tried both with the pad on and off, no clipping on either setting, so I kept going with the pad off, and I rose the gain 35db without clipping.

     Then I got back to try the BFP Hi-z, and no headroom, but it didn’t clip, it might be because I was playing fingerstyle, or using less strength plucking. I don’t think the DI could have any interference on this scenario.

      This morning I went back at it, the pad seems to muffle the sound, I´m not quite sure if it just lowers it, but it feels like a slight roll off on the guitar volume, taking out the poisonous frequencies that might set back rhythm playing to a uncontrollable mess, but sometimes I like it fully open.Frankly, most of the times, as I might dial down the gain on the software I´m using. The hi-z input returned to its behavior, it shows clipping every time i hit the strings harder, and on the lower strings most of the time, both on +4dbu, or -10dbv. They sound both quite well, but clipping shows its ugly face. nevertheless, rarely the green goes past 22db, but then the red starts to warn me about clipping.

I wonder, am I right, are the meters right? but that shouldn´t be an issue, when I purchased the BFP, I thought I was buying into no problem, straightforward flexible setup. Until now, that´s not the case.

I heard the Hi-z input lack of headroom was by request of the forum members, and done with a firmware update. It doesn´t seem they thought it well enough.

Thanks for your concern and advice.

You say with the passive D/I Box
a) "I am able to set adequate gain levels." What concrete gain levels on which analog input (1, 2, 3, 4)?
b) It "sounds conventional" with "limited headroom".
     What is the limitation? Please detail the metering; what average and peak levels do you see?

That you can set an adequate gain level and be limited with headroom sounds like a contradiction.
You have to deliver more details; see a) and b) to better explain what you mean, and to get a clue about what the problem is.

What passive D/I box do you use?

Please note three important points:

1. You should better use an active D/I box because a passive one will most likely impact higher frequencies of the signal
https://www.thomann.de/de/palmer_pan_02.htm €66

2. You need to connect the D/I Box to either Analog 1 or 2 IN, NOT (!!) 3+4, as 3+4 are limited to a max input level of +13 dBu at gain 0

3. You need to activate PAD on Analog 1 or 2 IN; otherwise, you won't get the max input level of +19 dBu!!!

I checked the specs of Babyface Pro FS, UCX II, 802 FS, UFX III, 12Mic.

I think you are right, stagx, the Babyface Pro FS instrument input alone doesn't seem to be the best solution for your guitar with some hotter Humbuckers.

Look at the maximum input levels of the Instr inputs at @0 gain:
- Babyface Pro FS: +13 dBu
- UCX II: +13 dBu
- 12Mic: +18 dBu
- 802 FS: +21 dBu
- UFX II/III: +21 dBu

Since you probably don't want to switch to an 802 FS or UFX II, the only alternatives for you are:
- using a D/I box
- lowering the output volume of your guitar

I would recommend using an active D/I box connected to the mic/line input 1-2 via XLR. With PAD activated, this gives you a +19 dBu maximum input level, significantly more headroom than the instrument input 3-4 with +13 dBu. A passive D/I box would not work well here, as the mic input impedance of only 2 kOhm would load down the pickup and cause high-frequency loss.

I would take a look at products like Palmer PAN 02 (or PAN 02 Pro) or Radial J48.

The PAN 02 will be sufficient. The Pro version has additional features like extra boost, that you won't need in your case of already having too high an output level. But the switchable attenuator might be practical.

All products support phantom power. The Radial needs phantom power and has no battery option.

     Thank you, I tried with a passive DI on the mic input, and i´m able to set the adequate gain levels for my setup, with plenty headroom.

     But, mysteriously, the Hi-z input on the Babyface seems to be more "conventional" now, for the lack of better words, but with limited headroom.

     I didn´t test yet any active PUs, perhaps things get better. I don´t set aside myself doing mistakes, since it is a sophisticated piece of equipment with some learning curve.

    incidentally, the guys where I shop the interface messaged me asking how am I liking the interface, I´m going to tell them what´s happening. I´m a little frustrated because I can´t believe this lack of headroom.   

     Those interfaces you recommended are overkill to my setup, I already have enough i/o for a rock band, that´s all I need. But, I´m willing to investigate further the RME lineup. I already own a Fireface the original 800, and Totalmix left great memories.

I think you are right, stagx, the Babyface Pro FS instrument input alone doesn't seem to be the best solution for your guitar with some hotter Humbuckers.

Look at the maximum input levels of the Instr inputs at @0 gain:
- Babyface Pro FS: +13 dBu
- UCX II: +13 dBu
- 12Mic: +18 dBu
- 802 FS: +21 dBu
- UFX II/III: +21 dBu

Since you probably don't want to switch to an 802 FS or UFX II, the only alternatives for you are:
- using a D/I box
- lowering the output volume of your guitar

I would recommend using an active D/I box connected to the mic/line input 1-2 via XLR. With PAD activated, this gives you a +19 dBu maximum input level, significantly more headroom than the instrument input 3-4 with +13 dBu. A passive D/I box would not work well here, as the mic input impedance of only 2 kOhm would load down the pickup and cause high-frequency loss.

I would take a look at products like Palmer PAN 02 (or PAN 02 Pro) or Radial J48.

The PAN 02 will be sufficient. The Pro version has additional features like extra boost, that you won't need in your case of already having too high an output level. But the switchable attenuator might be practical.

All products support phantom power. The Radial needs phantom power and has no battery option.

Using guitars with Gibson Classic Humbuckers.

In the past I used UFX+, UFX III, now 12Mic's Instr inputs.
When I look at my 12Mics Inst input settings, then I am using 21 dB gain on the Instr input.
Min and max gain settings are 8 and 50 dB.
So I can lower the Instr gain by 13 dB (to 8) and increase it by 29 dB (to 50).

The Gibson classic Humbuckers are good/standard passive pickups, which are not too hot
and were used with most premium rock and jazz guitars from the custom shop (Les Paul, 335, Byrdland, L-5).
Single Coil pickups need additional 2-3 dB gain.

I am not sure how hot your guitars are.
Wondering that it does not fit with the Babyface, maybe the specs are different.

Thanks, but I believe that´s what I wante to do on BabyFace, being able to set the gain myself, but it seems to be locked to -10, the supposed DI input, +4, the line input, and another with a Db boost.

I came from a Zen Q, and I set the gain as you set on the UFXs, and 12 micpre. the exact figures were around 12 or 30 db boosting, with clean signal, then I did the math on Cubase inputs and take off the same amount I gave previously.

that´s my workflow, the guitars sound great, volume is nice, but I want to be in control.

   however, even if the clipping wasn´t happening the signal seems to be boosted, I want to know if that perception is wrong or right, and what´s the amount of the boosting, so I can give my software the correct information.