Topic: Running multiple audio interfaces together ?

Not sure if this is a silly question but going to ask anyway.

I have a UFX + and running 4096 buffer inside fl studio.

Is it possible to add another ufx + via thunderbolt daisy chained to increase the buffer to 8192 buffers ?

2 (edited by ramses 2019-07-26 07:54:06)

Re: Running multiple audio interfaces together ?

Sorry but I do not understand your question.

To increase the buffer ? You add a 2nd recording interface to increase the amount of channels.

Manual chapter 10 tells you that the driver supports currently up to three UFX+.

BR Ramses
UFX+, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub12Pro

Re: Running multiple audio interfaces together ?

Hi Ramses

Trying to figure out how i can increase my DAW buffer size from 4096 to 8192 in FL Studio with a project 44.1k.

I can see that 8192 is avail in the manual but not sure why its not showing as an option in the asio panel . Maximum is 4096 ?

I am using a UFX+ with thunderbolt cable and can you explain how to get 8192 to be an option in Asio panel ?

4

Re: Running multiple audio interfaces together ?

By using USB. TB does not require that large buffers, nor does it bring any further advantage.

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

Re: Running multiple audio interfaces together ?

Tried USB 3.0 and with 192k the 8192 appears.

However at 44.1K using USB 3.0 the maximum asio panel  is 2096 buffer size. But with thunderbolt at 44.1k its 4096.

So there is a slight advantage to using thunderbolt and that is you can have a higher buffer on a lower project sample rate.

Is there any chance in the future that 8192 could be added to thunderbolt  at 44.1K ?

Re: Running multiple audio interfaces together ?

Just curious, why do you need largest buffer? Here the gains going higher then 1024 are none to so minimal I can't detect it. I can understand 8129 at 192k as it is same as 2096 at 44k.

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
Babyface pro fs, HDSP9652+ADI-8AE, HDSP9632

7 (edited by ramses 2019-08-16 10:16:10)

Re: Running multiple audio interfaces together ?

taccess wrote:

Tried USB 3.0 and with 192k the 8192 appears.

However at 44.1K using USB 3.0 the maximum asio panel  is 2096 buffer size. But with thunderbolt at 44.1k its 4096.

So there is a slight advantage to using thunderbolt and that is you can have a higher buffer on a lower project sample rate.

Is there any chance in the future that 8192 could be added to thunderbolt  at 44.1K ?

You are mixing causalities and priorities somehow.

The objective is really not to compare or to kind of "rate" USB and Thunderbolt technology by its max buffersize.

Thunderbolt IS external PCIe and MC explained already that it does not need so high buffersizes for this reason.
There is nothing better than PCIe to connect devices to a PC !

Besides this RMEs driver quality and performance is so well that you do not have to worry whether to use the one or other.
At the end it simply boils down for you what works best on your system, whether Thunderbolt or USB3 works better.
Depends on factors like BIOS, mainboard designs, HW/Driver quality of mainboard / thunderbolt cards.

Simply use what works best and fits your demands best.

I personally like USB3 because:
- you have a much broader choice of mainboards
- cable length up to 5m when using good quality USB3 cables from Lindy with 3 shields
- the plugs are IMHO more robust (not so tiny like with Thunderbolt)

Thunderbolt driver has a functional advantage, it still supports the pitch function of the driver if you need it. With the new USB transfer modes, which are required for this high number of channels, the pitch is not supported anymore under USB in the MADIface driver.

Simply use the ASIO buffersize that you need for your project, three examples:

A) If you record something with VSTi (guitar playing via VST amp loaded in the DAW), then you need very low ASIO buffersizes, because the RTL (round time latency) needs to be below 12ms otherwise you will feel uncomfortably and at a certain latency you will immediately slow down.

B) If you record life then simply take the higher ASIO buffersize, so that the CPU load is at minimum. Then the CPU gets lower amount of IRQs and is less unders stress. By this the likeliness to loose Audio is minimized.

C) If you are mixing it depends how many tracks, VST, VSTi you use and what CPU load they cause. Lower RTT can be nice in some situations, but the priority is stability, you should avoid having too high Spikes in ASIO and CPU load.

You can look here that I have no audio drops when playing back a Cubase Project with 400 Tracks and 2 VST per track
no matter whether I run this with 32 ASIO Buffers @44.1 or 64 ASIO buffers @88.2. https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … cks-de-en/

BR Ramses
UFX+, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub12Pro