Topic: UFX+ expandability

Hello guys,

Is there a way to successfully connect SPL Madison (madi?) and Audient asp 880 (adat?) with fireface UFX+ ?

Will this setup give 16+8+12 total line inputs or (12mic preamps  + 24 line inputs) and 24 outputs?  What about the sample rate on this setup?

On that budget (ballpark) is there another setup that you will choose for total of 30-36 inputs (6 - 12 with mic pres) and 20-24 outputs?

Thanks

2 (edited by waedi 2021-01-22 05:43:25)

Re: UFX+ expandability

I don't have those devices but I can tell you something out of my experience / knowledge.
Question 1 : Yes.
UFX is master and the two other buddies are slaves. Sync (or clock) shall be set to external (on the madi and on the adat).
The adat should therefor be onnected with two cables, In and Out for receiving the UFXs clock on the input socket.
I would do the same on the madi unit (I am not sure if it is different to adat syncwise.)

Question 2: Yes. All your ins and outs should be available. I didn't calculate it, you get what the units offer.

Question 3 sample rate : The most easy way is to run everything in 44.1 kHz.
The adat offers 8 channels In and 8 channels Out, but only half if you choose 96 kHz.
Question 4 : No-Yes, it is possible to setup 2 Digiface with 8 adats (64 Mic inputs - 64 Line outs)
Depending on the budget you have to take adats from a cheap source.
to have it perfect, you take 8 pieces of Octamic ll connected to 2 Digiface USB and there you go with 64 mics and 34 headphones where every headphone has its own monitor mix !How cool is that !

OSX M1, Babyface (soundstudio-to-go), started with PST8, Multiface I, Multiface II, PCIeMadi

Re: UFX+ expandability

To Waedi 1) MADI connection is a ring connection, you can't only use 1 connection, you need the connection back to the UFX+.

To Waedi 3) AFAIR the automatic recognition of double speed is not always possible, you might have to change this on the connected device. I think this is the case with ADAT.

To 4) UFX+ with MADI is IMHO the best choice. As preamp you could consider the 12Mic, which can be used for MADI and also offers AVB capabilities, if that should be needed in the future.

See my blog articles about UFX+ alone and in combination with Octamic XTC via MADI and a combination of UFX+, XTC and 12Mic:

About UFX+ and its flexible use for recording:
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … 8-RME-UFX/
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … -DURec-DE/

About UFX+ in combination with Octamic XTC (MADI setup example) and UFX+ with 12Mic and XTC:
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … Cber-MADI/
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … XTC-DE-EN/

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro20H2, Cub11Pro, UFX+ (v0.9735), XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE

Re: UFX+ expandability

Ramses and waedi Thanks for your answers.

Ramses (great great info out there), because I already have some good external pres, I lack line inputs and line outputs.

I was thinking of audient as adding 8 mic pres at a good price to my collection, but I first need line inputs and line outputs from good converters and an interface with great expandability and the lowest latency possible.

What is the perfect setup for this? I am a little confused.

What waedi answered on Q4, looks like a good setup for my needs. Digiface as the main interface and the ability to add extra converters depending on your needs. Also I ve never thought of using 2 usb interfaces in one pc.  I ve also looked on some Digiface avb or dante.

That was what I had in mind as a setup too, but with UFX+ as my main interface given that it can handle 94x94 channels.

The thing though, that there is not one protocol (eg all madi or all adat) is a bit confusing and I don’t know if I got it right with the connections... Also, even if I have it right, it is maybe incompatible/unstable? Or it is ok ? Will it be better if I removed the audient adat connection and just keep the Madison? 

Con Diagram

https://ibb.co/XDny621

So given that this setup will be on a control room and not on a live situation, is dante or avb a better choice? Should I go fireface Dante / usb / Avb and with what interfaces? Or stay UFX+?

Re: UFX+ expandability

Create a MADI ring with multiple AD/DA units like your SPL Madison and e.g. another SPL Madison or Ferrofish A32 or Ferrofish Pulse MX for additional line inputs/outputs. It works flawless and you can assign/route the channels up to the maximum of 64 channels as long as you run it 44.1 or 48kHz.
There's no problem using ADAT devices on top of the MADI (like your Audient ASP 880).

General remark:
The total available IO count of the RME UFX+ should be enough and it's not a good idea to try and use multiple audio interfaces on one PC.

6 (edited by ramses 2021-01-22 14:31:26)

Re: UFX+ expandability

Thanks lightbox, just notices you were faster than me wink Ok .. but here we go .. what I already typed in..

One quick answer in terms of your drawing, if you connect UFX+ ADAT OUT to the external device
then this device should be able to learn clock from the UFX+ through ADAT. Then WC is not required.

To answer the rest ..

I would not suggest a solution based on two Digiface USB recording interfaces.
Then you have two TM FX instances where you can not route the input of interface to the output of the other interface.

You need to count how many channels you require and with which sample rates you need to work.
Is single speed enough or do you need double speed ?
By channel multiplexing the amount of channels for MADI and ADAT is only half with doublespeed.

AVB allows for more channels (128) and if I remember right the bandwidth is only limited by the bandwidth of the links of the underlying switch structure. In terms of AVB I would recommend to talk to RME, because there I have no practical experience. With AVB you need additionally AVB switches when connecting more than 1 AVB device.

ADAT offers 8ch at single speed, 4ch at double speed and max cable lenght is 10m (standard) with RME 16m works as well.
MADI offers 64ch at single speed, 32ch at double speed and max cable lenght is 2km (multimode) or 10km (single mode)

Newer RME devices like 12Mic and M-1610 Pro allow you to choose the type of SFP, then you can choose whether you want to take multimode or single mode (laser based). For older MADI devices you need to tell RME when ordering, whether you want single mode. Otherwise the default is multimode which is in most cases fully sufficient. 2km between every device .. uh wow wink

OM3/OM4 Patch cables are usually available in 30m length, for longer connections in a buillding your have surely optical inhouse cabling. So if you connect 8 MADI devices from device to device and back to the recording device then you can already build a chain of 9x30 = 270m wink Thats more and more flexible compared to TOSLINK cabling.

USB/TB
UFX+ gives you flexibility to connect to the PC with USB3 and Thunderbolt. USB2 also possible, but then without MADI.
It has 1 MADI bus, optical and coax and offers nice features like DURec for backup recordings.

If PCIe cards are possible:
- HDSPe MADI has 2 MADI busses
- HDSPe MADI FX has 3 MADI busses and performance optimized driver and the only PCIe card with FX chip
   2x optical and 1xcoax with daughter card, but with an optional card you get 3x optical in total

Or you consider MADIface XT ... 2x optical MADI bus, 1x coax.

Or you consider something AVB based ....
- Digiface AVB
- 12Mic
- M32-Pro AD
- M32-Pro DA

You can also consider to integrate existing MADI devices into AVB like shown in my 12Mic review, this this pic:
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/index.php/Attachment/2648-03-Use-Cases-jpg/

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro20H2, Cub11Pro, UFX+ (v0.9735), XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE

Re: UFX+ expandability

Ohh thank you so much for the king info lightbox and ramses you made things clear.

I got it now.  And I m between 3 options.

I could go  HDSPe MADI FX + RME M-32 AD Pro + RME M-32 DA Pro that is 32/32 channels @ 192 with zero latency and it is near 9000€ (in my country).

Also

I could do  HDSPe MADI FX + 2 x SPL Madison that is 32/32 channels @ 192 (with zero latency) ? and it is near 4500€.

And

I could do UFX + SPL Madison + Audient 880 that is 36/24 channels @ 192 (with some latency) ? and it is near 4700€.

So for the first option, thinking that my studio will never reach above 40in/40out simultaneously and a 16-26 is a number close to its reality when it comes to multitrack, does the extra 4000€, have to do with expandability options and other stuff but not the quality of the converters? Should I invest those 4000€ somewhere else eg new pres?

What do you say about the other two options, that are almost the same price?

Re: UFX+ expandability

I could do UFX + SPL Madison + Audient 880 that is 36/24 channels @ 192 (with some latency) ? and it is near 4700€.

And you could do UFX+ and up to 4 x SPL Madison (or 4 x Ferrofish Pulse MX or 2 x Ferrofish A32) + 2 x Audient 880 wink

9 (edited by ramses 2021-01-22 20:55:39)

Re: UFX+ expandability

> I could go  HDSPe MADI FX + RME M-32 AD Pro + RME M-32 DA Pro that is 32/32 channels @ 192 with zero latency

Is your requirement to have
- 12 Mic Inputs and
- minimum 24x analog I/O
available at quad speed (192 kHz) ?

With devices like M-32 Pro AD/DA this is IMHO only doable with a recording device supporting 3 MADI busses.

The RME M-32 Pro AD and DA alone fully utilized one MADI bus at double speed (96 kHz). Quad speed is according to manual only possible if you use the two MADI connectors on the M-32 Pro AD/DA (1x optical, 1x coaxial).

Alone by this you need best a recording device with 1x optical and 1x koaxial MADI and then you need still a certain reserve for the 12 Mic ports at quad speed. One more MADI bus gives you 16 ports at 192 Khz, so you could connect either one 12Mic or 1-2 XTC on a third MADI bus.

Whats IMHO good possible for a nice 192 kHz setup:
HDSPe MADI FX with the optimizing ASIO driver (only allocates computer resources for active ports in groups of eight).
- MADI1 (optical) + MADI3 (koaxial) : for M-32 Pro AD and DA
- MADI2 (optical): for 12MIC

https://www.thomann.de/de/rme_hdspe_madi_fx.htm €1489
https://www.thomann.de/de/rme_m_32_ad_pro.htm   €3589
https://www.thomann.de/de/rme_m_32_da_pro.htm   €3589
https://www.thomann.de/de/rme_12mic.htm                €2548    ----- TOTAL €11.215

You could also use the Octamic XTC for 8 Mic Ports, but I wanted to make it possible to you, to use the devices also for AVB, if there should be a certain demand for it...

Please see here further information about the HDSPe MADI FX:
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … Pro-FS-BE/
Excellent is the optimized driver. The inputs and outputs are divided in groups of eight. If no port in such a group is in use then the driver does not allocate resources for these 8 channels. So if you put channels, that you use more often more to the front, then you can safe computer resources nicely.

Another options would be to use something USB3 based, like the MADIface XT, if PCIe is not possible for whatever reason.
According to the amount of channels and the optimizing driver I personally would prefer the e HDSPe MADI FX.

HDSPe MADI FX is also nice as it has analog ouputs for phones, MIDI ports and even AES, so that you could nicely add a ADI-2 Pro FS R BE via AES for the perfect phones preamp and your main monitors. But this is no requirement, you have enough perfect ports with the M-32 Pro AD/DA.

For such a solution I would use RME ... With the HDSPe MADI FX you can route any input to any output, because one recording interface supports that many channels and you do not have to work with multiple TM FX instances.

All connected devices support power redundancy. I would plan for this on the computer as well for power redundancy.
And all devices would also support AVB (prepared for the future).

With MADI you have IMHO the advantage that you have p2p links, fully independend from anything else and you save at the moment the costs for 1 or more AVB switches depending on where the devices are located...

As the HDSPe MADI FX supports TotalMix FX, you can also connect an ARC USB and have a nice controller by this for the TM FX control room.

This is btw also the only PCIe card from RME which has a FX chip on bord.
A very nice solution.

If you get the 12Mic, then soon you will also be able to remote control it as AUXDEVICE so that all Preamp settings can be stored in TM FX snapshots ... AUXDEVICE support is promised to be added to the 12Mic.

Following a 4-eye principle I would contact RME, whether this setup is ok, I might have overlooked something.

You should also have an eye on, that your PC is capable to run a full workload of around 76 ch max @192 kHz.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro20H2, Cub11Pro, UFX+ (v0.9735), XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE

10 (edited by KZe 2021-01-24 02:59:56)

Re: UFX+ expandability

Lightbox thanks. I was ready to press the button on Thmn but then Ramses came and raised the price (6000+) and now I m thinking again tongue

I think I'll keep the price low though.

Thank you for the detailed info guys anyway, you 've made things clear. I really appreciate it. Thank you.

11 (edited by ramses 2021-01-24 14:12:57)

Re: UFX+ expandability

@KZe, long story short .. jump to the end and use UFX+ wink

I made my proposal only because one of your statements in port #1 sounded as if you have a strong requirement for 192 kHz for a quite high number of channels (around 8-12 Mic Pres and maybe up to 24 analog ports. Therefore I checked very thoroughly for 192 kHz support and ended up with my proposed solution..

There might other solutions be possible, but then it would be very kind if you could be more specific in terms of your requirements.

Questions regarding A/D and D/A converter:

1.1) Does the number of analog in/out channels need to be equal ? Why I ask: the RME M-1610 Pro has more input than output channel, because most people do not need an equal amount of input and output channels. Additionally the the M-1610 do not have that "costy" display to cut some costs.

1.2) So, how many analog in, analog out do you need at minimum and what would be "nice to have" with a little reserve ?

1.3) Do you need to set reference levels per port ? I heard, in the old studio days you had the typical situations that all input and output ports were connected to the same device or same type of device. So it was sufficient to set the reference levels per inputs and outputs, but not per port (example: ADI-8 QS). In my home recording studio I have different requirements, I need to be able to set reference levels per port, so for me the newer devices like UFX+, M-1610 Pro (or even M-32 Pro if I would need that many channels) would be required, where you can set reflevel per port. To whatever device you look, you should ensure whether this requirement is met or not.

Questions regarding Mic Preamp:

2.1) How many channels do you need at minimum, what would be "nice to have" ?

2.2) Do you need additional Instrument ports ? Some RME devices offer 4 Instr ports (Octamic XTC, 12Mic)

2.3) Do you need a feature like Autoset to automatically set the proper gain (UFX+, XTC, 12Mic) ?

2.4) Do you need a feature like Auxdevice to be able to remote control the most important parameters of your preamp by TotalMix FX (by using the MIDI over MADI feature)?

2.5) Do you need a feature like Auxdevice to be able to easily store and recall your preamp settings in TotalMix FX snapshots?

If you answered any of the last three questions with yes, then you should look for a RME preamp like the Octamic XTC or the 12Mic. Note: Auxdevice support for the 12Mic will come later in a firmware upgrade. For the XTC its already available.

2.6) Do you need a feature like delay compensation, so that Mic Stereo recordings arrive sample exact at your DAW. Especially needed if the amount of Mic Pres is >1 and if it should not matter, to what device you connect the Mic stereo pair. RME MADI solutions with an XTC makes this possible. And it is also possible with AVB as far as I heard.

If you answered the last question with yes, then you should look either for a RME MADI solution and the Octamic XTC preamp or for a AVB based solution where I heard that the timing should be as exact as the delay compensation feature of RME MADI based solutions.

3. General question

3.1 Is recording in double speed required for all channels ?
3.2 Is recording in    quad speed required for all channels ?

Regarding ADAT based solutions

ADAT based solutions I regard as tricky (or even not really possible) because of the high number of channels and your demand to work with double or even quad speed.
Look at the RayDAT: 4x ADAT I/O
32ch in/out @44.1/48 kHz (single speed)
16ch in/out @88.2/96 kHz (double speed)
  8ch in/out @176,4/192 kHz (quad speed)
I think we can agree that ADAT with one PCIe card does not bring you any further if you look at double and quad speed.

If you think about using two cards, this is fine:
64ch in/out @44.1/48 kHz (single speed)
32ch in/out @88.2/96 kHz (double speed)
16ch in/out @176,4/192 kHz (quad speed)
But then you have
- still not enough channels for quad and maybe even double speed
- limitations in TM FX routing, because you can route channels with TM FX only inside of one instance.
Workaround would be to route in the DAW, but then you loose a certain flexibility by TM FX routing / loopback functions.
You need to use two optional WC modules to synch by word clock, check whether you have so many Slots free in your computers tower. For two RayDAT cards with WC you need already 6 Slots.

MADI based solutions in contrast to ADAT
Several advtantages:
- more channels 64 vs 8 at single speed
- higher cable length, up to 2km (with single mode even 10km between each of the devices in a MADI "chain")
- everything over MADI, even the management traffic (MIDI over MADI) saves you MIDI cabling

Things would be much much easier to you if you would use double speed and quad speed only with fewer channels:
then you could use an UFX+ with its nice features and DURec.
Then you can still decide or "differentiate" whether you want to make use of RMEs unique features for preamps or not, like Autoset, Auxdevice for remote control and storing/recalling Preamps settings in TM FX snapshots.

And you could make use of all the very nice features of the UFX+..
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … 8-RME-UFX/
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … -DURec-DE/

Additional Advantage of RME Mic Preamps / ADDA converter
Additional features that other devices do not offer, e.g.
- power supply redundancy (12Mic, M-1610 Pro, M-32 Pro)
- remote management over MIDI, MIDI over MADI, Ethernet (AVB products)
- three different remote management options (MIDI remote, Auxdevice, via Browser), individual for each device, check)
- Delay Compensation over MADI (and AVB)
- Format conversion features between MADI, AVB, ADAT, AES .. (individual for each device, check)
- Class Compliant mode to connect even to iPAD (Octamic XTC)
- Features like Autoset, PAD, INSTR, one or two phones outputs (individual for each device, check)
- Integration of MADI devices into AVB
- Start with UFX+ and MADI, but your devices are also capable to be operated in an AVB environemnt

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro20H2, Cub11Pro, UFX+ (v0.9735), XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE

12

Re: UFX+ expandability

@KZe, long story short .. jump to the end and use UFX+ 

I made my proposal only because one of your statements in port #1 sounded as if you have a strong requirement for 192 kHz for a quite high number of channels (around 8-12 Mic Pres and maybe up to 24 analog ports. Therefore I checked very thoroughly for 192 kHz support and ended up with my proposed solution..

There might other solutions be possible, but then it would be very kind if you could be more specific in terms of your requirements.

You are right. No there is not such need 48 is enough for the things I ll do (record bands) but you know, due to the fact that I m buying some equipment I just want to do it well. So futureproof is coming to my game of thoughts.


Questions regarding A/D and D/A converter:

1.1) Does the number of analog in/out channels need to be equal ? Why I ask: the RME M-1610 Pro has more input than output channel, because most people do not need an equal amount of input and output channels. Additionally the the M-1610 do not have that "costy" display to cut some costs.

Not exactly. An extreme scenario on my plan and only for live recordings is 26 out and 36 inputs. But they are extreme. So yes I need more inputs

1.2) So, how many analog in, analog out do you need at minimum and what would be "nice to have" with a little reserve ?

Given that I have 10 pres now, I m thinking of at least 10 line inputs and 16 outs

1.3) Do you need to set reference levels per port ? I heard, in the old studio days you had the typical situations that all input and output ports were connected to the same device or same type of device. So it was sufficient to set the reference levels per inputs and outputs, but not per port (example: ADI-8 QS). In my home recording studio I have different requirements, I need to be able to set reference levels per port, so for me the newer devices like UFX+, M-1610 Pro (or even M-32 Pro if I would need that many channels) would be required, where you can set reflevel per port. To whatever device you look, you should ensure whether this requirement is met or not.

It will be nice but also I m considering that line inputs will receive signal form pro external mic preamps like AMS Neve 1073LB

Questions regarding Mic Preamp:
2.1) How many channels do you need at minimum, what would be "nice to have" ?

At least 18

2.2) Do you need additional Instrument ports ? Some RME devices offer 4 Instr ports (Octamic XTC, 12Mic)

No not at all

2.3) Do you need a feature like Autoset to automatically set the proper gain (UFX+, XTC, 12Mic) ?

2.4) Do you need a feature like Auxdevice to be able to remote control the most important parameters of your preamp by TotalMix FX (by using the MIDI over MADI feature)?

2.5) Do you need a feature like Auxdevice to be able to easily store and recall your preamp settings in TotalMix FX snapshots?
If you answered any of the last three questions with yes, then you should look for a RME preamp like the Octamic XTC or the 12Mic. Note: Auxdevice support for the 12Mic will come later in a firmware upgrade. For the XTC its already available.

Very optional

2.6) Do you need a feature like delay compensation, so that Mic Stereo recordings arrive sample exact at your DAW. Especially needed if the amount of Mic Pres is >1 and if it should not matter, to what device you connect the Mic stereo pair. RME MADI solutions with an XTC makes this possible. And it is also possible with AVB as far as I heard.

It is optional for me, but great feature

If you answered the last question with yes, then you should look either for a RME MADI solution and the Octamic XTC preamp or for a AVB based solution where I heard that the timing should be as exact as the delay compensation feature of RME MADI based solutions.

3. General question

3.1 Is recording in double speed required for all channels ?

No


Ok  95% decision is taken by leaving the Audient asp880 (ADAT) and replacing it with XTC Octamic

Cool! Very cool!
Thanks

13 (edited by ramses 2021-01-25 14:38:22)

Re: UFX+ expandability

Sorry but I still do not get your requirements together, because there are still conflicting statements. Example:

to 1.1 you say: "yes I need more inputs" (than outputs)
to 1.2 you say: "Given that I have 10 pres now, I m thinking of at least 10 line inputs and 16 outs"  But that is more outputs than inputs.

And I am questioning myself why you mentioned recording at 192 kHz in post #7 for all three option that you saw at this point.
This sounded as if you really intend to record at quad speed (192 kHz).
And now you talk about single speed. It would have saved me a lot of time knowing this earlier.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro20H2, Cub11Pro, UFX+ (v0.9735), XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE

14

Re: UFX+ expandability

1.1+1.2 -> Yes I need more inputs.  With UFX+, the spl and the octamic it is 36inputs (12 mic preamps + 26 line 10 for my pres and another 16 for new pres or other inputs) and 22 outputs. And that is exactly what I need. This 36/22 is great for me.

And I am questioning myself why you mentioned recording at 192 kHz in post #7 for all three option that you saw at this point.
This sounded as if you really intend to record at quad speed (192 kHz).
And now you talk about single speed. It would have saved me a lot of time knowing this earlier.

Sorry for that. You ve made me understand things though. I was very confused with connections and speeds.

For me 192, is an optional requirement, but as I can have it by replacing the audient with xtc, I decided to do so. I ll also get better convertors and pres than the audient.

And I now think that the above setup can record at 192 right?

Again: Sorry I bothered you so much

Re: UFX+ expandability

At 192kHz, the UFX+ has a total of 34 audio inputs and 34 audio outputs

16 (edited by ramses 2021-01-26 10:02:37)

Re: UFX+ expandability

lightbox> At 192kHz, the UFX+ has a total of 34 audio inputs and 34 audio outputs

AES is bridged with ADAT2 (not really two separate inputs, see block diagram in the manual), because of this you use either ADAT2 or AES. So I would more say: 32/32.

KZe> And I now think that the above setup can record at 192 right?
         [Comment Ramses, this setup: UFX+, Madison, Octamic XTC]

Not with the full amount of channels: if you connect Madison and Octamic XTC to MADI, then you are using 16+8 = 24 input channels.

MADI bus channel count:
64ch @single  speed (44,1/48)
32ch @double speed (88,2/96)
16ch @quad    speed (176,4/192)

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro20H2, Cub11Pro, UFX+ (v0.9735), XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE

Re: UFX+ expandability

ramses wrote:

AES is bridged with ADAT2

No, it's not. Maybe you confused it with another interface but on the UFX+ they aren't bridged.
Also, check the manual for "Channel Count under ASIO" and "Channel Count under Core Audio". wink

18 (edited by ramses 2021-01-26 13:17:36)

Re: UFX+ expandability

lightbox wrote:
ramses wrote:

AES is bridged with ADAT2

No, it's not. Maybe you confused it with another interface but on the UFX+ they aren't bridged.
Also, check the manual for "Channel Count under ASIO" and "Channel Count under Core Audio". wink

Hi lightbox,

thanks for your comments.

Would be more than glad if this should have been changed, but AFAIK it's still the case for the UFX+, that you can't use ADAT2 and AES port fully independend from each other.

Could you kindly have a look at the block diagram in the manual on page 120
https://www.rme-audio.de/download/fface_ufxplus_d.pdf
https://www.rme-audio.de/download/fface_ufxplus_e.pdf

I have my ADI-2 Pro connected behind UFX+. Monitors and Phones are connected to ADI-2 Pro.

ADAT1 was already in use for other things and my goal was to use ARC USB and two different routings / TM FX snapshots
to switch audio between Monitors and Phones on the ADI.
This is achieveable by configuring the ADI-2 Pro, e.g. that audio
- from AES is being sent to Monitors
- from ADAT is being sent to Phones

But it was not possible due to the fact, that ADAT2 and AES were not two completely independend ports on the UFX+.
It was not possible to send audio to AES or to ADAT2.

Are you really sure that this has changed?

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro20H2, Cub11Pro, UFX+ (v0.9735), XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE

19 (edited by vinark 2021-01-26 13:25:48)

Re: UFX+ expandability

He Ramses from reading the manual and looking at the block diagram and earlier experiences with RME devices I can not see why this would be the case unless you set adat port 2 to be optical spdif (then it will mirror AES?). If set to Adat, which the adi2 can receive, adat2 and AES should be fully independent as it has always been.

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
Babyface pro fs, HDSP9652+ADI-8AE, HDSP9632

20 (edited by ramses 2021-01-26 13:35:45)

Re: UFX+ expandability

Thanks vinark, then I need to retry.
Maybe this situation arose when I tested long ago with a D/A converter in my HiFi amp (wanted to use HiFi as Monitor B in TM FX), for this purpose I needed SPDIF protocol for ADAT2.

Now situation changed, that I have an ADI-2 * product in front of my HiFi, thus I can switch this to ADAT protocol, because the ADI-2 DAC/Pro is able to pick the 1st two channels out of the ADAT stream.

Thanks for pointing out again that only in this AES/SPDIF setting the ports are bridged, not when operating in ADAT mode. This was indeed not clear to me.

I will report back if I have the time to test, many thanks lightbox and Vinark :-)

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro20H2, Cub11Pro, UFX+ (v0.9735), XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE

Re: UFX+ expandability

Thanks vinark for clarifying this while I was at work. smile

@ramses: In the MADIface settings you can switch Optical 2 In and Optical 2 Out to AES/SPDIF mode to use it for optical S/PDIF. That's when the switch(es) in the block diagram come into action and replicate In/Out 13+14 on the optical ports of ADAT 2.
In ADAT mode the ports are independent.

22 (edited by ramses 2021-01-26 19:39:31)

Re: UFX+ expandability

You're both fully correct, Vinark and lightbox, many thanks.
Now I need to think about what I like more.
Full ARC USB based control or like before a mixture of ARC USB and ADI-2 Pro control using remapped keys to switch.
What I am missing now is the slow ramp-up and -down when switching between monitors and phones at the ADI.

What I like with this setup, that "Monitor B" can get two different assignments, to toggle between:
1. Monitors (RL906) and HiFi
2. Phones (LCD-3) and Monitors (RL906)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dq7htfonlnqgsdx/ARC%20USB%20-%20Routing%20UFX%20und%20ADI-2.jpg?dl=1

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro20H2, Cub11Pro, UFX+ (v0.9735), XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE

23

Re: UFX+ expandability

Great. I did my homework and everything is clear about connection types smile.  So as lightbox said from the beginning UFX+ can be easily combined with the other equipment using low sample rates (44.1 / 48). But we have channel capacity problems on highest sample rates over ADAT and MADI.

From the above examples UFX+ is  32in/32out @192kHz  (12/12 from itself,  4/4 ADAT and  only 16/16 madi) or 34/34 with aes.

There is one last thought:

Lets keep it low and stay on what lightbox said:

And you could do UFX+ and up to 4 x SPL Madison + 2 x Audient 880 wink

Comparing only quality of the devices @ 44.1/48 and considering that I need inputs and outputs and a low latency interface

1)
UFX+ (12in/out), 1 x SPL Madison (16in/16out), Audient ASP 880 (8in).
A setup with madi and adat @ 44.1/48  ) = 4650€

2)
UFX+ (12in/out), 1 x SPL Madison (16in/16out), RME Octamic XTC (8in).
A setup with madi @ 44.1/48 that actually is @ 96kHz (please correct me if I m wrong: and can stay @96kHz for another 8in/12out or  @ 44.1/48 can expand to another 32in/48out.) = 5741€

3)
UFX+ (12in/out), RME M-32 AD Pro (32in), RME M-32 DA Pro (32out)
A setup with madi @ 44.1/48 that actually if it stays like this, it can go to 96kHz or can expand to another 32in/32out. Also later (if there is a need) without the UFX+, keeping m-32s we can move to the AVB world  ) = 9420€

And the question is: All setups satisfy my needs. I would say that 1-2 are better for me because 1) have more inputs 2) have ADAT and aes that I can use with some ext effects 3) with 36in/24out and the ability to expand, I think I ll be ok for lets say the next 15 years/ever.

So with the above scenario and setup (@ 48kHz), by comparing only converters quality, will there be a noticeable difference between the:
a) SPL Madison vs RME M-32 AD/DA Pro
b) Audient ASP 880 line level vs RME Octamic XTC  line level
c) Audient ASP 880 pres vs RME Octamic XTC  pres

Re: UFX+ expandability

KZe wrote:

So with the above scenario and setup (@ 48kHz), by comparing only converters quality, will there be a noticeable difference between the:
a) SPL Madison vs RME M-32 AD/DA Pro
b) Audient ASP 880 line level vs RME Octamic XTC  line level
c) Audient ASP 880 pres vs RME Octamic XTC  pres

1. Smart move to stick with 48kHz! Don't buy the hype.
2. Converter quality isn't really an issue these days. A lot has changed over the last decade, converters in this category of devices have become infinitely better.

25 (edited by ramses 2021-01-27 12:13:29)

Re: UFX+ expandability

yes, stability, features and operational concepts become more important
For Mic Pres I would not like to miss features like Autoset and remote control by TM FX (Auxdevice).

In your proposal #3 (UFX+ and M-32 Pro AD and DA) you miss IMHO Mic Pres.
UFX+ offers 4 Mic Preamps on the device. But if you only connect AD/DA converters (M32-Pro) then you need additionaly external Preamps (space, cost).

I would go #2 and you need to look whats fits best into your plans, XTC or 12Mic. Nice with the XTC: normal 8-port scheme ideal for MADI, 4 AES Ports, ADAT, USB for audio, 2 phones outputs, 4x Instr, 4x PAD ... a great very versatile device.
If you do not need AVB compatibility ... you can easily stay with MADI.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro20H2, Cub11Pro, UFX+ (v0.9735), XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE

Re: UFX+ expandability

My two cents regarding mic preamps:
The 4 mic preamps in the UFX+ are great, no doubt. And I'm sure the Audient 880 preamps will do the job just fine. But to be honest with you, I would much rather go with the minimum of mic preamps you need now ... and then in the long run add mic pres (channel strips) with a certain mojo (like Neve 1073, Avalon 737SP, Universal Audio 6176, Tegeler VTRC, ...).
Of course it all depends on what you actually plan to do with the mic pres ... but generally speaking, RME mic pres are neutral workhorses without any "sound shaping" features, without any "character". In pretty much every musical situation I can imagine you'd find mic pres better suited for the job. The only application where I would recommend (additional) RME mic preamps is broadcast where you don't want to color spoken word and just need technology that works and works for years on end without ever even touching it. But even there they are on a decline due to the widespread use of wireless microphone systems.

Bottomline:
Don't throw your money out of the window just for the purpose of having e.g. 12 mic pres if you don't actually need them now. One Neve or Avalon channel strip can add more to your studio than 12 good yet boringly neutral mic pres. smile

27

Re: UFX+ expandability

Great guys Thank you. Lightbox you are right. I m a little bit old school and I already have some pres

one 10x 500 rack with
2x 1073LB, 1x Chandler TG2, 2 x Great River MP-500NV, 1 x Portico 511, 2 x API 512)   
one Avalon V5 and
I m waiting for a WA tonebeast and a focusrite isa two.

So It is 12 pres. + 4 on the ufx, this is a great start. I want to continue adding pres but I was thinking to add Audient 880 or XTC first

Guys one last question (I know I ve said that before) If it is madi, is this cable ok?
https://www.thomann.de/gr/pro_snake_lwl … om3_1m.htm
And this for the adat?
https://www.thomann.de/gr/optical_kabel_1m.htm

28 (edited by lightbox 2021-01-27 19:55:26)

Re: UFX+ expandability

@KZe: Nice preamp collection you already have, congratulations.
Regarding your last question, yes, it's the Duplex SC->SC cable (the bigger connector compared to the Duplex LC). Now for the ADAT cable, my personal recommendation would be this one from Thomann. The reason is that I use them since ages and they are absolutely great because they are super lightweight, click and sit properly in the ADAT jacks. The cable you linked is much heavier (including the bulky plugs) and can much easier drop out of the jacks.

Re: UFX+ expandability

Don't know whether you have other applications for optical fiber cable or whether you have or will have structured cabling.
I personally use OM4 cable, since it is not so much more expensive, but a newer cabling standard enabling for (if I remember right) higher throughput and longer cabling length.

Mutec cable is very solid and best in terms of useability. I had one time the much thicker Sommer TOSLINK and this is a nightmare as the cable is so stiff, that it issues some "side" force to the plug. Mutec works for me up to 15+1=16m with RME (between UFX+ and ADI-2 Pro / with a TOSLINK switcher in between) up to 192 kHz. Due to the selected high quality TOSLINKS in RME devices and I think that also the Mutac quality is just right for that.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro20H2, Cub11Pro, UFX+ (v0.9735), XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE

30

Re: UFX+ expandability

Very cool. OM4 and Mutec! Again thanks for the great support and sorry for bothering you so much, you did a great job making this clear to me!

31 (edited by ramses 2021-01-27 21:35:44)

Re: UFX+ expandability

Don't worry, was nice that we found something suitable for you. Thanks lightbox for the good collaboration :-)

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro20H2, Cub11Pro, UFX+ (v0.9735), XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE

32 (edited by lightbox 2021-01-27 22:29:41)

Re: UFX+ expandability

You're welcome smile
Enjoy the new setup once it's done.

One small remark (or personal opinion) regarding the additional pre amps (Octamic XTC) I can't spare the fellow readers:

I do appreciate the fact that these preamps can be remote-controlled from TotelMix FX or RME MIDI Remote software. This is great for "set and forget" applications. In case of a common music recording studio application I very much prefer hands-on control. It's just way faster and more intuitive (to me).
This just isn't possible with the Octamic XTC (or even the older Micstasy).

So if you mention that you are "a little bit old school", just be aware that you'll have to get used to reach for the software instead of (non-existing) dedicated knobs in the side-rack or desktop rack.

Since I'm also a little "old school" and like to have quick hardware control for these basic and important things, I would likely NOT buy the Octamic XTC. I love TotalMix FX, no doubt. But certainly not for mic pre control, I even rarely use the built-in 4 mic pres of the UFX+ for this exact reason.