1 (edited by ramses 2019-11-15 19:04:44)

Topic: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

EN: https://www.rme-audio.de/babyface-pro-fs.html
DE: https://www.rme-audio.de/de_babyface-pro-fs.html

From the product page on web:
In the new Babyface Pro FS even more improvements were implemented:

  • +19 / +4 dBu switch on the bottom adds a direct way to reduce the output level, thus improves SNR for sensitive active monitors, avoids distortion / overload, and helps to keep TotalMix FX faders near 0 dB instead of high attenuations.

  • Full SteadyClock FS circuit as in the ADI-2 Pro FS for lowest jitter and highest jitter immunity.

  • 3.5 mm TRS phones output power rises from 70 mW to 90 mW.

  • THD of both phones outputs improved by up to 10 dB.

  • Uses same output op-amps as ADI-2 Pro now.

  • Output impedance of 3.5 mm TRS lowered from 2 Ohms to 0.1 Ohms.

  • Mic inputs SNR improved from 112.2 dB to 113.7 dB, TRS Line inputs SNR improved from 114 dB to 116.3 dB (120 dBA).

  • THD Line inputs improved by 8 dB.

  • 6 samples less latency on the AD side by new ADC (5 samples AD, 7 samples DA. It won't get quicker...).

  • All the above improvements were achieved without raising the units power consumption.

  • K-slot for theft protection.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10 Pro 2004, Cubase 10.5.20, UFX+, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, ARC USB

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

Do I understand correctly that Babyface PRO FS has better specs (preamps, converters) than RME UFX 2/+?

3 (edited by ramses 2019-11-16 15:36:25)

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

EDIT: No, I think it has simply better specs than the old BBF Pro (without actually looking)

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10 Pro 2004, Cubase 10.5.20, UFX+, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, ARC USB

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

Yeah, that's for sure, but how it looks in comparison to UFX 2?
Here's what I found on RME website:

1. INPUTS:

(SNR): 115 dB RMS unweighted, 118 dBA - UFX 2 FRONT
VS.  (SNR): 113 dB RMS unweighted, 116 dBA  - UFX REAR
VS. (SNR): 113,7 dB RMS unweighted, 117 dBA - BBF PRO FS MIC
VS. (SNR): 116 dB RMS unweighted, 120 dBA - BBF PRO FS LINE

THD: < -110 dB, < 0.00032 % UFX 2
VS. THD: < -112 dB, < 0.00024 %. BBF PRO FS

THD+N: < -104 dB, < 0.00063 % UFX 2
VS. THD+N: < -108 dB, < 0.00035 % BBF PRO FS

Channel separation
> 110 dB  UFX 2
> 110 dB BBF PRO FS

2. OUTPUTS:
Dynamic range (DR): 115 dB RMS unweighted, 118 dBA UFX 2
Dynamic range (DR): 115 dB RMS unweighted, 118 dBA BBF PRO FS

THD: < -110 dB, < 0.00032 % UFX 2
THD: - 106 dB, 0.0005 % BBF PRO FS

THD+N: < -104 dB, < 0.00063 % UFX 2
THD+N: -102 dB, 0.0008 % BBF PRO FS

I'm not the best at reading technical specifications, but from what I understand, it seems that BBF PRO FS is better than UFX 2 in some aspects and most of the time is at least the same (or very, very, very close). Am I wrong?

5 (edited by ramses 2019-11-16 15:38:49)

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

Ah ok, thanks for the side by side comparison.
Well then this is indeed a very nice enhancement for the BBF Pro as product.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10 Pro 2004, Cubase 10.5.20, UFX+, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, ARC USB

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

Does this mean it's really on a par with RME UFX 2 when it comes to inputs/outputs quality or am I missing something?
I'm asking because I still haven't updated my RME UC and thought it could be a good idea to buy BBF PRO FS and connect it to my old interface to achieve better sound quality.

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

A few dB SNR more and a little bit THD less are not the most critical factors for interface selection and good sound.
Its simply good for the BBF Pro as product.
But a BBF Pro can't really substitute an UFX II / UFX+.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10 Pro 2004, Cubase 10.5.20, UFX+, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, ARC USB

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

Ok, so what is? What should I look at and why it won't substitute UFX2? My old RME UC works fine, but I feel that I could benefit from better output converters and at least 2 better sounding inputs. At the beginning of the year I wanted to buy UFX+, then you recommended me ADI-2 PRO and I couldn't make up my mind so... I decided to wait for an upgraded version UCX wink That's basically all I need, but unfortunately it's not on the horizon. That's why I thought that I could get this new BBF Pro and connect it with UC when I need more inputs/outputs... Do you think that getting UFX 2/+ is a better option?

9 (edited by ramses 2019-11-16 23:16:47)

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

> but I feel that I could benefit from better output converters and at least 2 better sounding inputs

For this purpose you can get ADI-2 Pro FS and connect it to the UC digitally via either ADAT or SPDIF.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10 Pro 2004, Cubase 10.5.20, UFX+, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, ARC USB

10

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

Comparing the Babyface Pro/FS with the UFX II based on some tech specs makes no sense. Go to our website and look at the front and rear of the UFX II. Compare that to the I/Os at the BF Pro. Totally obvious these products can't be compared.

These are very different products with a very different feature set. The few dBs difference here or there are meaningless, especially as the UFX II is more flexible in level management.

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

tattva wrote:

I'm asking because I still haven't updated my RME UC and thought it could be a good idea to buy BBF PRO FS and connect it to my old interface to achieve better sound quality.

What’s wrong with the UC’s sound quality?
Are you sure it’s the weakest part in your setup and you would even be able to hear a difference?

12 (edited by ramses 2019-11-17 13:49:37)

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

Room optimization and better monitors/phones give you more advances in sound compared to changing D/A converters.

A better D/A converter can add to sound quality and resolution/sound stage, it depends on the room and capabilities of your equipment (monitors / phones) how much they can benefit from better D/A conversion. In the near field the room might have not so much impact if the monitors are designed for the near field and have a narrow sweet spot.

But if you want to benefit from better D/A conversion quality with your current setup, then I think the D/A conversion quality needs to be significant higher compared to the difference between UC and BBF Pro FS which might be too little. Don't forget that the ADI-2 Pro/DAC units are designed to be reference converter and measurement frontends. Its not the chip alone that gives you audible quality, also the circuit design is very important for the final result.

I personally would consider to keep the UC and to add either an ADI-2 Pro or ADI-2 DAC via ADAT or SPDIF to your setup.

If you want to compare phones with the same high quality phones section of the ADI-2 Pro FS, then get this unit.
It also offers to you analog inputs and AES.

If you are only concerned about D/A conversion quality, want a remote and if 1 phones output is enough and want it to a very good price below €1000, then go for the ADI-2 DAC which has a lower price tag (~€300 less) at ~€999.

The new ADI-2 DAC offers a bigger remote (RME Multi-Remote Control) which gives you more functionality and has a newer model of AKM D/A chip (4493) with a new "Short Delay Low Dispersion" filter and some measureable enhancements in SNR and THD that comes along with the new chip.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10 Pro 2004, Cubase 10.5.20, UFX+, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, ARC USB

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

MC wrote:

Comparing the Babyface Pro/FS with the UFX II based on some tech specs makes no sense. Go to our website and look at the front and rear of the UFX II. Compare that to the I/Os at the BF Pro. Totally obvious these products can't be compared.

These are very different products with a very different feature set. The few dBs difference here or there are meaningless, especially as the UFX II is more flexible in level management.

Yes, I understand that there are many differences, but I just wanted to compare AD/DA conversion and preamp quality. I own RME UC so I was wondering if BBF PRO FS as an addition would be a worthy update.

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

hselters wrote:
tattva wrote:

I'm asking because I still haven't updated my RME UC and thought it could be a good idea to buy BBF PRO FS and connect it to my old interface to achieve better sound quality.

What’s wrong with the UC’s sound quality?
Are you sure it’s the weakest part in your setup and you would even be able to hear a difference?

I've had Antelope Zen Tour for a week or two and the difference in sound quality was very noticeable. I had to return it because their drivers and software are shit, but it sounded much better than Fireface UC.

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

ramses wrote:

Room optimization and better monitors/phones give you more advances in sound compared to changing D/A converters.

A better D/A converter can add to sound quality and resolution/sound stage, it depends on the room and capabilities of your equipment (monitors / phones) how much they can benefit from better D/A conversion. In the near field the room might have not so much impact if the monitors are designed for the near field and have a narrow sweet spot.

But if you want to benefit from better D/A conversion quality with your current setup, then I think the D/A conversion quality needs to be significant higher compared to the difference between UC and BBF Pro FS which might be too little. Don't forget that the ADI-2 Pro/DAC units are designed to be reference converter and measurement frontends. Its not the chip alone that gives you audible quality, also the circuit design is very important for the final result.

I personally would consider to keep the UC and to add either an ADI-2 Pro or ADI-2 DAC via ADAT or SPDIF to your setup.

If you want to compare phones with the same high quality phones section of the ADI-2 Pro FS, then get this unit.
It also offers to you analog inputs and AES.

If you are only concerned about D/A conversion quality, want a remote and if 1 phones output is enough and want it to a very good price below €1000, then go for the ADI-2 DAC which has a lower price tag (~€300 less) at ~€999.

The new ADI-2 DAC offers a bigger remote (RME Multi-Remote Control) which gives you more functionality and has a newer model of AKM D/A chip (4493) with a new "Short Delay Low Dispersion" filter and some measureable enhancements in SNR and THD that comes along with the new chip.

I'm pretty sure my setup has potential to sound better. It did with Antelope Zen Tour. I've just talked about ADI-2 with a mixing engineer who uses external converters and he says it's great, but probably not for me. I often record more than two channels at the same time, so from what I understood ADI-2 wouldn't work for me...

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

I talk about D/A and you about A/D.
I think for the usual signals that you record with i.e. a Microfon you might not require the quality of an ADI-2 Pro.
You will have most benefits for the mix and the mastering or listening to music.
Therefore also an ADI-2 DAC might be sufficient for you.

As you talked about Antelope .. if you look closely, the very high values in SNR they also do not reach for all I/O ports.
Mostly for the two ports where you connect main monitors.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10 Pro 2004, Cubase 10.5.20, UFX+, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, ARC USB

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

I take it this isn't meant as an upgrade for current Babyface Pro users. The specs look mostly identical but with a few refinements here and there, particularly on the headphone outs. I had the original Babyface and then upgraded to the Pro when that came out.

18

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

Excactly that. And no need to upgrade for existing BF Pro users.

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

MC wrote:

Excactly that. And no need to upgrade for existing BF Pro users.

But still, is there any improvement in sound in the headphones? Or the sound quality remain exactly the same?

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

I would like to confirm the sound quality between UFX2 and Babyface Pro FS in terms of the analog input and microphone input. Which is better? Currently, I am using UFX2 but recently I almost sold the analog device. Thus, the IO of Babyface Pro will be enough. I am thinking to change to Babyface Pro fs for the small footprint on the desk.

21 (edited by ramses 2020-01-07 07:26:09)

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

galcia0429 wrote:

I would like to confirm the sound quality between UFX2 and Babyface Pro FS in terms of the analog input and microphone input. Which is better? Currently, I am using UFX2 but recently I almost sold the analog device. Thus, the IO of Babyface Pro will be enough. I am thinking to change to Babyface Pro fs for the small footprint on the desk.

And what does that mean in relation to the question from David10, how the sound quality of phones is compared between BBF Pro FS and UFX II ?

This reads as if it was mainly the form factor that was decisive for the selection, but says nothing concrete in terms of i.e. volume or sound differences.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10 Pro 2004, Cubase 10.5.20, UFX+, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, ARC USB

22 (edited by bossmanottoman 2020-05-04 09:17:10)

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

tattva wrote:
MC wrote:

Comparing the Babyface Pro/FS with the UFX II based on some tech specs makes no sense. Go to our website and look at the front and rear of the UFX II. Compare that to the I/Os at the BF Pro. Totally obvious these products can't be compared.

These are very different products with a very different feature set. The few dBs difference here or there are meaningless, especially as the UFX II is more flexible in level management.

Yes, I understand that there are many differences, but I just wanted to compare AD/DA conversion and preamp quality. I own RME UC so I was wondering if BBF PRO FS as an addition would be a worthy update.


im curious about this too. if the babyface pro FS AD/DA and pres/ line inputs is on par with the UFX+.. i understand the UFX+ is much much more flexible when it comes to expandability. Just talking about the specific basics functions mentioned above.

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

Not only this, UFX+ has useful functions like
- New MADIface driver allowing 32 samples ASIO buffersize
- DURec and internal real time clock for correct timestamps
- AUTOSET
- Higher Mic gain 75 vs 65 dB
- Fully standalone operateable
- Dampening of power-on noise on all output channels not only phones
- ARC USB can be directly connected to the device
- two phones outputs
- Full implementation of FX chip, with BBF Pro some things are being computed on the PC by driver

See comparison excel sheet here: https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … B-MADIfac/

There are a few nice renovations and improvements on the BBF Pro, very nice for this small form factor interface.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10 Pro 2004, Cubase 10.5.20, UFX+, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, ARC USB

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

Is there reason to think that what appears to be an improved latency spec means that the BF Pro FS will perform perceptibly better than the UC with MIDI instruments?

25

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

No.

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

Thank you, Matthias. Is that because the improvement is too small to be noticeable, even for playing MIDI drums in real time, or because the improved latency spec doesn't actually affect MIDI performance?

27 (edited by ramses 2020-09-16 17:04:06)

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

USB driver / transport and MIDI transport didn't change.
Faster converter are interesting for analog audio (AD/DA), but have no impact on MIDI (pure digital transfer).

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10 Pro 2004, Cubase 10.5.20, UFX+, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, ARC USB

Re: Wow, the new Babyface Pro FS

I understand. Thank you, Ramses.