• Registered: 2020-11-28
  • Posts: 7

Topic: UCX vs Babyface Pro Fs Headphone Amp

Hey guys, it’s between these two units, and the headphone amp is very important to me —both audio quality and power. I test mics and other gear for production and need a headphone amp with plenty of power for listening to mics with DT880’s @250 ohms. Audio quality is equally important.

I formerly had a ufx+ and it was fantastic in both regards, so I’m wondering if the BF Pro Fs or UCX can compare, and how they compare to each other.

Also curious how the sonics of the preamps compare between these.

Thanks in advance!

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,869

Re: UCX vs Babyface Pro Fs Headphone Amp

> I formerly had a ufx+ and it was fantastic in both regards,

You sold it ? Just out of interest, why.
As you say its a very good device and has nice powerful phones outputs.

> so I’m wondering if the BF Pro Fs or UCX can compare, and how they compare to each other.

You can have a look at the excel sheet that I provide in this blog article...
See line 54 - 59 for available technical data of phones outputs, that I found in the manuals:

https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … B-MADIfac/

Here the direct download link for the Excel file:
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/index.ph … 0-08-xlsx/

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • Registered: 2020-11-28
  • Posts: 7

Re: UCX vs Babyface Pro Fs Headphone Amp

Thanks for the info. I was using the UFX+ for location recording which I’m not doing anymore. It’s overkill for what I’m doing now, so I sold it.

I’ve been using an Apollo twin mkII since then, but I’m not happy with the sound of the headphone amp or the ability to drive my DT880’s. I frequently have to max out the amp to get enough volume. I’m concerned that the babyface pro might have the same issue since it’s a bus powered device.

I’m also planning to get an M1 Mac mini soon, and who knows when UA will get around to supporting those....

4 Reply by MC

  • MC
  • MC
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Germany/Thailand
  • Registered: 2007-04-06
  • Posts: 25,440

Re: UCX vs Babyface Pro Fs Headphone Amp

mdmitch2 wrote:

I’ve been using an Apollo twin mkII since then, but I’m not happy with the sound of the headphone amp or the ability to drive my DT880’s. I frequently have to max out the amp to get enough volume..

That's strange. According to the tech specs the phones output provides 80 mW @ 600 Ohm. That is +19 dBu in level, and identical to the UFX+.

mdmitch2 wrote:

I’m concerned that the babyface pro might have the same issue since it’s a bus powered device.

The BF Pro reaches 6 dB less level (+13 dBu) with high impedance phones.

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

MC's Website

  • Registered: 2020-11-28
  • Posts: 7

Re: UCX vs Babyface Pro Fs Headphone Amp

MC wrote:
mdmitch2 wrote:

I’ve been using an Apollo twin mkII since then, but I’m not happy with the sound of the headphone amp or the ability to drive my DT880’s. I frequently have to max out the amp to get enough volume..

That's strange. According to the tech specs the phones output provides 80 mW @ 600 Ohm. That is +19 dBu in level, and identical to the UFX+.

Thanks for the info -- that is interesting, and doesn't seem to reflect real world experience. I wish I still had the UFX+ to do a more thorough side by side comparison.

  • Registered: 2020-11-28
  • Posts: 7

Re: UCX vs Babyface Pro Fs Headphone Amp

I went ahead and ordered a babyface pro Fs. I’ll report back as to how the headphone amp compares to the Apollo.

  • Registered: 2018-12-29
  • Posts: 5

Re: UCX vs Babyface Pro Fs Headphone Amp

mdmitch2 wrote:

I went ahead and ordered a babyface pro Fs. I’ll report back as to how the headphone amp compares to the Apollo.

Hello! So what the conclusion? How the headphone amp compares in both of them? Which is nice to listen/more power etc? Did you done direct comparison or you dont have apollo anymore?

8 Reply by MC

  • MC
  • MC
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Germany/Thailand
  • Registered: 2007-04-06
  • Posts: 25,440

Re: UCX vs Babyface Pro Fs Headphone Amp

Did you misread the date of that post? Most probably the ordered BF Pro did not yet arrive.

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

MC's Website

  • Registered: 2020-11-28
  • Posts: 7

Re: UCX vs Babyface Pro Fs Headphone Amp

The BF Pro FS arrives Sunday. I’ll report back next week. smile

10 Reply by mdmitch2 (edited by mdmitch2 2020-12-07 20:18:22)

  • Registered: 2020-11-28
  • Posts: 7

Re: UCX vs Babyface Pro Fs Headphone Amp

Itachi1701 wrote:
mdmitch2 wrote:

I went ahead and ordered a babyface pro Fs. I’ll report back as to how the headphone amp compares to the Apollo.

Hello! So what the conclusion? How the headphone amp compares in both of them? Which is nice to listen/more power etc? Did you done direct comparison or you dont have apollo anymore?

At full volume, the BF Pro Fs has about 2db more volume than the Apollo Twin MKii. I ran a TRS cable in between the units and the headphones and used a multimeter to measure the outputs of each with the tone generator in cubase... The BF had +1.91dB at max output using the 1/4" headphone out. It also seemed to be a bit more high fidelity, revealing some very high frequency information that the Apollo was lacking. As a result, the Apollo was a little smoother and 'nicer' to listen to, but seemed less accurate. This assumes that the high frequency information wasn't the result of distortion that was only present in the RME, but that seems unlikely. @MC can you confirm that there would be no audible distortion with the BF at max headphone volume?

Next I will compare the preamps.... so far very impressed with the BF Pro FS!

  • Registered: 2018-12-29
  • Posts: 5

Re: UCX vs Babyface Pro Fs Headphone Amp

THNX. As for preamps (i saw some comparisons) i found apollo to be more silky and "expensive" but with some midrange bump. RME is just more flat and neutral. Maybe RME`s neutrality is good for the sound but when it comes for vocal tracking the neutrality is not what you need. But this is what i heard from youtube comparison. I`ll wait for your reply