I fear, there is not enough space in my Computer case to put in 2x RayDat with a
HDSPe Multiface Card and a  2HE-GraKa.

• Is it possible to mod this that i only need 1HE for a RayDat with 4x ADAT i/o?

• It's correct that i can't use my MultifaceII "as one Soundcard" with 2 RayDat's together?

(i want let the Multiface2 build in, and use it as DAC for a RayDat, and have a extra MIDI Port additionaly)

Thank you very much Ramses!

I fear that the performance difference, between an USB and PCIe solution.
I notice a  performance difference between MultifaceII and ADI2pro, when the "Cubase performance" is on the limit.

And ADI2's would be perfect, i don't need preamps. I use external preamps. (Headphone Out's are also very useful for me)

I've "calculated":
       
2x    RayDat    1200€
ADI2pro        -
4x Adi2        2000€ (i calculate 500€ for a secondHand ADI)
adi2FS        700€
____________________
12 In's 14out's @ 3900€, in best quality

(+ 8 i/o from the Multiface2)

Thank you Ramses!

I have no issue with my ADI2pro as Soundcard.
But when i reach the end of the performance with many VSTi's and VST's, i can't work with the ADI2pro because of through dropout's but with the MultifaceII it's possible to work "at the peak of performance".

_________________________________________

2x RayDat, 1x ADI2pro, 1x ADI2FS, 4x ADI2, MultifaceII Setup costs me: 3900€ (because i have already a ADI2pro and a MultifaceII)

_________________________________________

Your suggestion (thank you very much for that)
Ferrofish Pulse16 MX 1100€
UFX+             2200€
costs me: 3300€ (and i have no use for my Multiface2 anymore)

_______________________

Thank you in advance Ramses!
_________________________________________

Thank you!!!

I use Multiface2 as ADI2pro as well as soundcard, and have with both no problem.
Just "at the edge of performance" (i'm mostly working with 32Samples @ 44,1khz) i notice, that the Multiface2 has lot lot less dropouts...

I don't need FX in TotalMix.
I just love Totalmix, and use it most for LoopBacks and such things, i'm trying to do everything in a Cubase project... (with 32Samples @ 44,1khz)

I didn't mind that TotalMix can't route directly over multiple cards, what could be a problem, but i think i could handle it...

I belive that the ADI2 is a better DAC than a Fireface? Or do i beliefe in misconceptions?

for 600€ More, than your suggested setup, i get a PCIe solution, and only ADI's for DAC, i think thats worth it, but i don't know...

In terms of ADDA quality look yourself and compare ADI-2 and UFX+ technical data  ... you will see that the UFX+ is a bit better (newer design). UFX+ is a four year newer design (2016) compated to ADI-2 (2012) and the successor of the old flagship interface UFX (which was from 2010).
Remember 2016 was RME 20th anniversary and the UFX+ got an overhauled analog section. It's a very nice interface and a solid basement for a studio, mobile use in a rack, standalone operation. You can directly connect an ARC USB. It's class compliant and works on ipad and maybe even on Linux (class compliance is at least an advantage to get it to work, I never tried though).
Also the two phones outputs are very nice.

Curious to hear, what you decided.

1. you could also consider to get the ARC USB for this setup, its very comfortably to work with.

2. Please note: you can't connect the ADI-2 FS to the HDSPe MADI FX, as the HDSPe card has no ADAT and the ADI-2 FS card does not support MADI.

If you should plan to cascasde the ADI-2 FS behind i.e. ADI-2 Pro's ADAT port makes no sense, you only would forward the same audio stream and have no possibility to switch. The ADI-2 Pro has also its own analog IN.

Also consider, for High End Monitoring you have already your ADI-2 Pro FS (-> Phones, -> Speakers).
And for recording your Synth's and other analog sources the inputs of either UFX+ and Pulse 16 MX should be fully sufficient.
If you want you can test analog recording between ADI-2 Pro and Pulse 16MX ..
Then compare, please at same levels and as blind test whether you can hear a difference.

As I already mentioned, the UFX+ would be more flexible with
- 8 analog I/O, each port switchable to an unique reference level
- 2 ADAT ports
- AES port (shared with ADAT2)
- 2 phones outputs
- DURec
- 4 Mic Inputs which can also be used as INSTR inputs, with Autoset feature
- Standalone Operation
- Class Compliant support
- ...

I recommend proactively, to get this USB3 card with FL1100 chip to fully isolate USB3 for UFX+ to be on the very safe side and to make use of the more efficient MSI interrupt scheme (message signalled interrupts):
https://www.heise.de/preisvergleich/son … 48037.html

Under Win10 a driver for FL1100 is already integrated, it only requires a PCIe x1 Socket.
The UFX+ manual tells you that FL1100 USB3 chip is fully supported with UFX+.

You can even use a 5m USB cable which gives you much more flexibility in positioning the recording rack,
if you use this high quality Lindy USB3 cable which has 3 shields:
https://www.amazon.de/gp/product/B07F6W … &psc=1

If I were you I would order both solutions (UFX+ and HDSPe MADI FX) to see the benefits of both devices
and then decide based on knowledge not "gut feeling".

Get in contact with i.e. Thomann, tell them that you are undecided, you have 30d money back.

For the setup:
- you can connect both devices to your PC, UFX+ and HDSPe MADI FX
- you can create a MADI Ring connecting all devices: UFX+ -> Pulse 16M -> HDSPe MADI FX -> UFX+
Then you
- only need to setup UFX+ routing in one TM FX instance
- HDSPe MADI FX routing in the other TM FX instance
- for windows sound you need to create 1 WDM driver in both cards both appear in Windows sound
- for ARC USB you need to deactivate it in the recording interface that you do not intend to use

This way you can test the whole setup very efficient.
You would only need to connect your ADI-2 Pro in standalone mode via AES
- one time to the UFX+
- one time via HDSPe MADI FX depending on what you test

As optical MADI cable I recommend you an OM4 Multimode cable, which is also common in the network area,
like also described in this article, there you can see some infos about MADI setup:
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … Cber-MADI/

You need one 0,5m cable for MADI cabling between UFX+ and Pulse 16M
and a longer one to your PC between UFX+/Pulse16M, if you have 5m USB cable, then also use 5m OM4 cable

https://www.reichelt.de/duplex-jumper-s … p;&r=1
https://www.reichelt.de/duplex-jumper-s … ct=vrt_pdn

What do you mean by 17 inputs ?
17 stereo inputs = 17 synthies/keyboards
= 34 analog channels ?

BTW UFX+ has 8 analog ports not 12.

Why do you intend to buy a Pulse 16 if you say that you want to record only via the ADI-2 FS?

What purpose do all the analog channels have, if you use for recording only 2 and you need to switch instantly the cables ? Makes no sense.

Did you ever think about, that the D/A converter in your synthies or keyboards will have even worse technical data compared to the A/D converter of the Pulse 16MX and the UFX+ ?
I bet you should be more than satisfied with the technical quality of the Pulse 16 MX and UFX+ to record all of your electronic devices without any unnecessary plugging/unplugging when recording.
At the end recording is a creative process and having to do so before a recording is simply unnecessary and nerves.

And BTW  if you want to record only with the ADI-2 FS ... it's much cheaper to use the existing ADI-2 Pro which has already analog inputs or do you really think you need a device with FS clock ? Or why the extra device ?

This all is IMHO unnecessary and makes your setup simply worse in handling.

In terms of connecting ADI-2 Pro FS and ADI-2 FS behind Pulse 16 MX ....
I do not know the pulse16 MX routing capabilities well. It is not sure whether you can route madi to adat.
I could think of that the adat ports are only there to communicate with the analog ports if MADI is not available in a certain setup.

You should build up a setup which connects all required electronic devices and you should be able to directly record the precabled devices.

ah, sorry for my inaccurate information, i didn't wanted to spam the thread with useless Information.

The Number in front of the devices are the counts of Line-Out's:

My Setup will be:
2 MS2000       
4 UltraNova       
2 DeepMind12   
4 FantomXa       
1 Minibrute       
2 ch preAmp    (Sontronic Sonra2)   
2 x1ch PreAmp    (Art Tube MP Project)
______
17 ins (i need less Out's then in's)

           
I'want that everything run's to the Cubase Mixer, that i can add FX and Mix...

And when i think, it's time to final record a synth, i plug it on the ADI2FS (my ADI2pro is usually used for my 2ch preamp)

Of coures it would be much nicer, if i could directly record with the DAC i'm monitoring the synths, but i don't find a appropriate solution (a RME 32DA and AD are overkill).

I think i will order a:

• UFX+ (i could use the 4 preAmps for Line-Signal than it has 12Line In's)

• Pulse 16 MX

• HDSPe MADI FX

• ADI2FS

and than decide: UFX+ and ADI2FS and ADI2PRO (16 in's @ 2,9k€ // i have allready an ADI2pro)
or: HDSPe MADI FX and Pulse 16 MX and ADI2FS and ADI2PRO (20 in's @ 3,4k€ // i have allready an ADI2pro )

It's really not required to record your synthies through  a separate ADI-2 FS.

Stay reasonable and ask yourself whether a €700 synthesizer will have a high-end D/A converter built-in, so that the A/D quality of i.e. the UFX+ or Ferro would not be sufficient...

Sorry, but you will only fool yourself by thinking this and at the end only entirely ruin the excellent workflow of your environment.

Simply record through UFX+ and/or Pulse 16 MX, thats the way to go.
Look alone at the specs of the UFX+, it's fully on par with the RME ADI-8 QS.

And the Ferrofish is also of high quality as it is simply build for ADDA and has not so many extra features compared to RME devices, thus the lower price.

Simply perform a valid testing with your biggest projects.
I am very positive in regards to the UFX+  because of the excellent performance on my pc with 400 tracks 2 vst per track with 32 samples @44.1 kHz but also with lowest ASIO buffersize @96 kHz.
But every system is a little different...
Therefore I strongly recommend testing the UFX+ and also with the Sonnet Allegro card, because message signalled interrupts work more efficent under load. And as you are worried in regards to system load I would proactively use this card.
Sadly the Pro variant is not available anymore as 4XFL1100 USB3 card. With a dedicated USB3 controller per port.
If you have a PCIe x4 socket free on your mainboard then eventually try to get one used.
It's an amazing card.
If you get the one which I linked to you then connect only the UFX+ to it so that it gets this FL1100 controller dedicated.

If you plan to get a rack for ufx+ and Pulse 16mx, then plan for 3 rack units because the ufx+ needs a little airflow as it is passively cooled.

You could also think about to rack the ADI-2 Pro FS, then take a 5 RU rack as the ADI-2 Pro also needs air. Look whether Pulse MX also fits into eco rack. If the rack is too deep then you only have issues when cablind. But of course you need to be able to close the back of the rack during transport. A little space in the back is nice to put cables in.

Don't get the rack before you finalized your purchase decision.

Free (1/2 RU)
Adi-2 Pro FS
Free (1/2 RU)
UFX+
Free (1/2 RU)
Pulse 16 Mx
Free (1/2 RU)

Use OM4 multimode fiber cables because you can also use them for PC networks.

When you have UFX+ and the HDSPE MADI FX then make a cool experiment and while testing the HDSPe card use the UFX+ solely as MADI Multitrack recorder.

In the HDSPe Madi fx driver settings dialog you can configure to mirror madi output 1 to madi output 2 and 3.
Then simply connect the UFX+ as recorder on MADI bus 2.

The Idea to capture "creapy Synths" with an ADI2FS.

I ll try to get the Sounds form this devices with Virtual Instruments and Effects.
It's no problem to sound alike, but the sound of the sound "has no steam behind it...".

And I find the Korg - Radias doesn't sound so fat like the Korg MS2000, i think, because it works to good,
i belive the fattnes of the MS2000 came partially from it's "dirty way to work", and i think a ADI2FS is the best way to get close at the sound, like with headphones pluged in, in the device.

Another benefit with 2 ADI's is the possibilety to record 4 preamps currently. (and i could compare ADI2pro with ADI2FS)

Merci. A second hand ADI2 is also cheaper...

I'm curious aboute the difference between ADI2 and Pulse 16 MX...

sry i edited my last post.

reading now...

OK. Thank you!!!
Good to know...

I forgot to say, I need min. 1 Headphone Out at my "Keyboard-wall".

Is the headphone out of the Pulse good as well, as from the ADI2?

I can not judge in terms of sound only in terms of the few technical data that I got.
But come on, the difference is very low...
And .. for you matters A/D and there the Ferrofish is is slightly better from technical data, so there is no problem.

Eine Alternative zum Ferrofish Pulse 16 MX:

https://www.thomann.de/de/spl_madison.htm

Brauchst in dem Fall nur noch Patchbays ... wegen DB-25 Anschlüssen ...

Kleines Manko: Referenzpegel nur für Ein- und Ausgang gleichzeitig änderbar.
Aber da Du ja eh nur A/D in Verwendung hast, egal.

Zumindest sollte die Wandler Qualität etwas über dem Ferrofish liegen ohne dass der Preis direkt eskaliert.

Analog Inputs/Measurements
    S/N: 115dB (A-weighted, 48kHz)
    Dynamic Range: 115dB (-60dBfs, A-weighted, 48kHz)
    S/(N+D): 102dB ( -1dBfs, 48kHz)
    Interchannel Isolation: 110dB (48kHz)

Analog Outputs/Measurements
    S/N: 115dB (A-weighted, 48kHz)
    Dynamic Range: 115dB (-60dBfs, A-weighted, 48kHz)
    S/(N+D): 100dB (-1dBfs, 48kHz)
    Interchannel Isolation: 110dB (48kHz)

Super Danke!!!

No, HADSPe MADI FX will be clock master and the cascaded devices need to be configured to learn clock via MADI, AES or ADAT.