• Aviv
  • New member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2020-04-08
  • Posts: 3

Topic: BABYFACE PRO FS vs. FIREFACE UCX

Greetings and Salutations!

Lately I've been considering several RME products as my next Audio Interface purchase,
and have come to a point in which I have to make a decision on whether to buy
(a) a used Fireface UCX, in what has been described to me an Excellent condition, or
(b) a new Babyface Pro FS.

Currently my work only involves CPU-Heavy Production and Orchestral Mockups.
I do very little if any recordings at all.

I was wondering if you could advise whether the Babyface Pro FS, being a newer model,
is also containing more advanced pieces of hardware and circuitry, and whether it would be
a better choice, considering my fairly minimal recording needs?
or should I go for the UCX which is slightly more expandable, just in case in the
next few years I'll fine myself in need of a more versatile piece of gear.

***I do NOT have Firewire, therefore no matter which of the pieces I choose, it will be USB operated***


Thank you, very much,
in advance!

2 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2020-04-08 20:47:32)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,880

Re: BABYFACE PRO FS vs. FIREFACE UCX

Maybe there are even better solutions but I need more information from you.

What is your budget for that ?
With what components did you work before ?

What other components do you have which need to be connected ?
Which sample rate do you usually use in your projects ?
Which ASIO Buffer size do you use usually ?
Do you have special requirements in terms of RTL (Round Trip Latency) between recording interface and PC, how many seconds maximum allowed ?

Do your projects have many audio tracks ?
Are your projects using many inserts in tracks ?
Do you use many or CPU intensive virtual Instruments ?

What computer do you have ? Apple, Windows ? Which OS version ?
Which HW ? CPU, Mainboard, DRAM  ?

Is USB the only option or could it also be something PCIe based ?
What digital ports do you need (MIDI, AES, ADAT, SPDIF) ?

What would you think about a combination of PCIe card in combination with an excellent AD/DA converter and phones preamp with outstanding features. Additionally a nice remote for TM FX control room:
either
- RME AIO   / ADI-2 Pro / ARC USB
or
- RME ADAT / ADI-2 Pro / ARC USB

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • Aviv
  • New member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2020-04-08
  • Posts: 3

Re: BABYFACE PRO FS vs. FIREFACE UCX

Hi Ramses!
Thank you for the quick response.

My budget at the moment is up to £700.
I worked with a rather simple (and very old) Lambda interface that was mostly ok for scoring and lightweight VSTs.
However now I'm going from Scoring to Production so I need something substantially better.

My other components are currently connected via USB so no worries there. I'm only thinking expandability for the future.
I think I'll be working mostly in 48kHz - but that really depends on the project.
My most stable Buffer so far was around the 256 mark, but then again - that was with a lousy soundcard.
As I mentioned, I rarely do recordings. However I will be playing virtual instruments and therefore low latency is important;
Anything below 6ms would be great. below 3ms would be ideal.

Track count will also vary depend on the project. But let's go with full orchestra for the bigger ones so at least 60 tracks.
I would usually use FX tracks for what I can, but sometimes inserts are unavoidable, yes.
Yes - I use orchestral libraries mostly. Sometimes Arturia synths as well, but mostly sample libraries.

I'm currently working with MSI GS73 8RE Laptop. Specs here: https://www.msi.com/Laptop/GS73-Stealth … cification

USB 3.0 / Thunderbolt are currently my only options.
Most of my MIDI devices connect via USB so no need for that at the moment but who knows.
I hope to be using ADAT to expand my inputs in the future to record live bands, but that is very far away atm.

PCIe is not an option at the moment I'm afraid, as I am working with a laptop.

Basic System Info:
Intel 8th Gen i7 8750H, 6 cores, up to 4.10GHz
x2 8GB DDR4 RAM (16GB Total)
256 GB SSD (C:/ Drive)
1 TB HDD (D:/ Drive)
Windows 10 64-bit

DAW: Cubase Pro 10

4 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2020-04-09 06:22:18)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,880

Re: BABYFACE PRO FS vs. FIREFACE UCX

Many thanks for providing these details, I was exactly looking for this kind of information.

It should be possible to use an external PCIe expansion case via thunderbolt 3 and to use a RME AIO PCIe card.
PCIe could have little advantages over USB if you have high CPU load.
Some of the Sonnet external thunderbolt cases support also Windows 10.
Shall you require additional analog ports for the AIO then consider the additional price tag involved.

In terms of driver the UCX and BBF Pro are using the same USB driver, there is no difference in performance. Lowest ASIO buffersize is 48.

The newer USB driver goes down to 32 samples buffersize, but then you would required an UFX II, which is out of budget.

As you are using a buffersize of around 256 anyway I see no strong demand here, as the differences are only marginal.
All RME ASIO drivers are very well without exception.

You simply need to look which interface gives you personally the best options / advantages.
Both interfaces, BBF Pro FS and UCX have a very nice form factor.

I would also consider where the interface would be on your workstation and how the cables would be routed there.

The BBF Pro would need a little more space for the cables if it were to be placed in the area to the right of your computer mouse. Therefore you have integrated something like a controller.

You can place the UCX more on the side or in the rack.

With a 700 pound budget, I wonder how you would get the UCX, because at 1039 pounds it would be out of your budget.

Maybe my comparison sheet helps you comparing the interfaces:
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/index.ph … 8-08-xlsx/
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/index.ph … 18-08-pdf/

Please note: the new Babyface Pro FS is not yet in, but still fair enough for a comparison and to get the overview.
The Product Page on RME Webserver tells you all details what has been enhanced on the new BBF Pro FS.

If you only need analog outputs for monitors and phones, but no routing capability, then you could also consider to get
an ADI-2 Pro FS R BE or ADI-2 DAC. If you need routing capabilities later you could put another RME interface into the front of it and connect the ADI-2 Pro/DAC digitally. Least expensive product for this purpose is the Digiface USB.

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13

5 Reply by Aviv (edited by Aviv 2020-04-09 12:29:12)

  • Aviv
  • New member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2020-04-08
  • Posts: 3

Re: BABYFACE PRO FS vs. FIREFACE UCX

Thank you so, so much, Ramses.
This information is extremely helpful!


The only thing I don't seem to fully comprehend is your suggestion about PCIe setup;
If I connect a PCIe device through Thunderbolt to a PC,
am I not losing a lot of the initial functionality and low-latency of the PCIe?
- - - - - - - -
From what I could find online - the Thunderbolt 3 external cases are quite pricey,
and combined with the AIO card I'm afraid it would definitely go above the £700 mark
which I can afford at the moment.
In addition to that, if I do move forward and start Recording, I will have to buy additional
Preamps that connect via ADAT or S/PDIF and I'm not sure I want to deal with that later on.
- - - - - - - -
Please correct me if I'm wrong about any of the above.
I'm very slow to understand the tech behind the screen (I just want to make Music!).


Lowest Buffer of 48 sounds great to me!
That would definitely help with the strain on my CPU.


I will prioritize functionality over space, and it looks to me like the UCX has a bit more functionality indeed.
I understand that the driver is the same in both - but is the hardware technology the same?
The UCX has been around for 8 years, hasn't it? The BBF PRO FS is a recent development.
- - - - - - - -
In the long-term, If I want to expand into multi-track recordings,
the I/O on the UCX seems more suitable in its out-of-the-box condition.


All of that being said, if I buy a UCX - it's from a guy who sells it to me Second-hand.
He assured me in several ways that it is in excellent condition - but maybe that doesn't really matter
and buying a used interface is a bad idea altogether?
I would love to know your thoughts on that.


I will have a look at the comparisons right away - thank you for that!


The ADI-2s are a little over my price range I'm afraid
and with the Digiface I'm afraid I'll come across the same issues of expandability as with PCIe.

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,880

Re: BABYFACE PRO FS vs. FIREFACE UCX

Some additional infos in terms of ASIO buffer size ...
You can't simply compare ASIO buffersizes between devices of different vendors by its numer/value.

It matters much how efficient the drivers have been actually written.
Not every vendor's ASIO driver reports the RTL properly to the DAW, where you can read the values as user.

In some reviews I noticed that the RTL of an ASIO buffersize of i.e. 256 of some other vendors
is nearly double compared to RME...

In one of my blog articles you can find an excel sheet what I achieve with different RME products that I own(ed):
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … 8-RME-UFX/
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/index.php/Attachment/2343-UFX-UFX-RayDAT-Latencies-v2-jpg/

And as you can see, stable even under heavy load:
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … cks-de-en/

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13