• Registered: 2018-03-30
  • Posts: 2

Topic: Rme UCX+ ...?

If there is UFX+ it would be most logical to assume that there is soon UCX+ (with thunderbolt and USB 3.0 support). Any timetable when it is going to be available and price?

I guess it will most likely be an interface that I am aiming for smile

2 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2018-03-30 13:16:51)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,886

Re: Rme UCX+ ...?

For this amount of channels you do not require more speed than USB2.
Even the MADIface Pro with its 68 (!) input and output channels only requires USB2.

And if you look into my blog article with an excel comparison sheet, then you see, that the RTT times of an UFX with USB is not that far from the USB3 values of an UFX+ or the RayDAT (PCIe):

https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … 8-RME-UFX/

https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/index.ph … ncies-jpg/

So .. USB3 and thunderbolt won't give to you any advantage for a recording interface with the amount of channels like an UC or UCX. It only raises the production costs and connection requirements on your PC / Laptop side.

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • Registered: 2018-03-30
  • Posts: 2

Re: Rme UCX+ ...?

ramses wrote:

For this amount of channels you do not require more speed than USB2.
Even the MADIface Pro with its 68 (!) input and output channels only requires USB2.
.

I am aware that USB2 bandwith is enough. Why I was asking for USB3 is because:

- There is history of compability problems of USB2 audio interfaces with USB3 host controllers. I was hoping that maybe if the interface is USB3, compability problems, audio glitches, etc.. are less likely

- USB3 has full duplex which is missing from USB2. In certain use cases this might be advantageous or can you prove that it makes no difference with audio interfaces? I would imagine that if you have a band playing and simultaneously are recording and routing monitoring signals for them etc.. that full duplexing would be advantageous?

- my experience of USB2 audio interfaces is that with lower latencies they glitch far too easily if there is even smallest amount of unneccessary CPU utilization in background. I was hoping that USB3 would reduce this or are USB3 interfaces equally sensitive for CPU glitches?

- I did not read your articles but I assume that they are tested with high-end PC/Mac gear. Majority of musicians (although few of them can afford RME) are doing music with mediocre gear which have most problems related to PC USB-architecture. When I hopefully have the means to buy an RME I want it to work also with an ordinary mediocre laptop (which you might need to use in an emergency situation for example) smile

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,886

Re: Rme UCX+ ...?

Thanks for clarification on this topic :-)

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • Registered: 2018-03-11
  • Posts: 32

Re: Rme UCX+ ...?

I can tell my experience using UFX+ with a Dell Vostro i7 2Gen 6GRam with USB 3.0 wasn't that different.
The audio also glitch as well with USB 3.0 even with the CPU at 30%.

But I won a MacPro early 2008 from my wife and just bought a PCI-E Sonnet Allegro Pro Card with 4 dedicated USB 3.0 ports. The card doesn't arrive yet, but when It cames I'll let you know if the USB 3.0 Chipset/interface would change something, in that matters so we can blame the computer or the protocol smile