1 (edited by Sciss 2022-11-27 13:43:58)

Topic: UCX II experience

Hi there,

contemplating on a new interface, and weighing the UCX II against similar MOTU devices. As I understand, RME still doesn't offer webbrowser based mixer like MOTU; I would like to know, if anyone successfully uses the UCX II on a standard linux, like Debian, and if this provides the _full_ functionality, i.e. all channels, all configurable? I guess not via alsamixer but just the hardware knobs. Those who do use it already, would you buy again?

Perhaps related - any reason RME interfaces seem no longer be available (no babyface, no ucx II)? https://www.thomann.de/at/rme_usb_audio_interfaces.html only lists 802 'sold out' and 'ravenna not yet available'. Did something happen?

Re: UCX II experience

What happened is the global supply chain problems along with the AKM factory fire two years ago.

Re: UCX II experience

Can I ask again – can anyone report their experience of UCX II on Linux? Can you fully configure the mixing matrix? Can you toggle all controls, such as turn on/off phantom power (this missing possibility is super annoying on the UCX I)? Can you use the to-USB-stick recorder? Does it run with Jack on Debian stable? Etc.

Thanks!

Re: UCX II experience

I've been an RME fanboy and user for twenty years now. I switched to the UFX II maybe three years ago - but I suspect that the UCX II performs equally well:

I work on a moderately tweaked Linux Mint system in Ardour mostly. CC mode is perfectly stable, I've not had one single crash or even dropout even with very small buffers/latency...

And here comes the BUT: The lack of Totalmix on Linux is still (after years on Linux) very painful. Yes, it is possible to use the knobs on the Fireface to control it - but I always found it quite fiddly and stopped using most of it (especially internal routing).

Concerning studio sessions I keep everything inside Ardour for simplicity - and I live happily doing so! Doing live recordings is where I miss Totalmix/DigiCheck the most...

So it is hard to say: RME hardware quality is still absolutely great. It works very well on Linux in CC mode, but prepare to forget the wonderful bliss you had with Totalmix...

DC rules!

5 (edited by novabusrst 2022-12-07 12:43:52)

Re: UCX II experience

I think on the UCX 2 also UFX 2 I think RME should have went with madi and follow the flow of the UFX plus

Durec was introduced and perhaps it may sound better than the older versions but I think RME should have taken the UCX a bit more into the pro life

Re: UCX II experience

After seeing an older Synthax video that said you can use total mix on an iPad mini with iOS 9, I wonder if this might be a less painful approach. Those are sold refurbished for 200 EUR, which would have to be added to the 1300 EUR that the UCX II currently costs.

Can anyone confirm that the specs are still ok for current total mix software? Apple iPad Mini 4 16GB, iOS 9 ?

I guess it would be simply to connect the iPad for mixer configuration, and then plug the USB back to the linux machine, since we're never leaving CC mode?

Re: UCX II experience

Sciss wrote:

I guess it would be simply to connect the iPad for mixer configuration, and then plug the USB back to the linux machine, since we're never leaving CC mode?

If RME is not able to provide Linux support, the options are to tolerate the prevailing situation, try to get someone to develop open source support, or change the manufacturer. The world is what it is.

8 (edited by ramses 2023-01-03 12:09:28)

Re: UCX II experience

It is not uncommon for the choice of application to determine both the hardware and the operating system. This has been the case since the beginning of IT.

I see it as a failing of the Unix manufacturers / community that they have not managed to develop a desktop system that is attractive enough for both users and software developers to compete with Windows and Apple.

In the past / beginnings of Unix the challenge used to be having to develop software for the 4 main hardware and operating system manufacturers: IBM, HP, Sun, DEC.

Surrounding conditions: the manufacturers used proprietary graphics accelerators and desktop interfaces / graphics libraries. The first standardization required was to settle on Motif to standardize both the GUI and the graphics libraries required by applications. Unfortunately, this also necessitated the rather high license costs for Motif.
The operating system, including the development system, also had to be standardized accordingly to have as few deviations as possible at the source code level.

As you can see, standardization was required to save all sorts of costs. It was just too expensive to have different systems for different applications. Development, support / training costs on the one hand and then costs for hardware, operating system, software licenses and training costs for the administration of different systems on customer side.

The current challenge, in my opinion, is that Linux does not cover all areas well. Here, too, support and development costs are simply too high and a certain lack of overall quality due to missing standardization caused by too many distributions/teams.

Ultimately, it is important for companies such as RME to be able to maintain the high-quality standards under Linux as well. And the expectations are pretty high.

Linux-support would certainly have been much easier to implement for many manufacturers, not only RME, if there had been a sensible form of standardization and a well-maintained, standardized overall system had been offered. But with the ridiculous number of over ~600 active Linux distributions, this is definitively not the case.

Instead of joining forces and working on a really better and competitive system, each team just wants to make their own, unaware that they are basically falling into the same pitfalls as others. But that doesn't create any quality or trust, only a certain chaos and imponderables. As an end user, you notice it best by how many Internet guides are outdated and how much the package management systems and maintainers of the packages are overwhelmed with reliably enabling the simplest things. Just changing the graphics driver to the proprietary nVidia driver is all too often a pain, and this is just one example.

A Unix system is only wonderful if the sum of the components is error-free and well coordinated. All the required applications that you are used to working with should also be available. The administration of two systems, Windows and Linux on one system does nothing but unnecessary work.

BR Ramses
UFX+, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub12Pro

Re: UCX II experience

> I see it as a failing of the Unix manufacturers / community that they have not managed to develop a desktop system that is attractive enough for both users and software developers to compete with Windows and Apple.

'splaining why Linux desktop is a failed company is entirely unhelpful, and sorry but I'm not reading this barrage of paragraphs. I suggest to get a life. Signed, happy Linux desktop user since seven years, formerly unhappy Mac user.

> If RME is not able to provide Linux support, the options are to tolerate the prevailing situation, try to get someone to develop open source support, or change the manufacturer. The world is what it is.

I would love to pick a different manufacturer. Any recommendations?

- MOTU: randomly works on Linux or not, they give a toss
- Focusrite: cheap enough that it mostly works, but then again not (had a major issue last week with my "trusted" Scarlett 18i20 suddenly messing up the
  alsa mixer and four analogue outputs missing, that was only resolved by improvising with the ADAT output)
- Behringer: so cheap they don't have a support; spend half a year getting my refund for a broken UMC, never again

Perhaps I'm missing something?

HNY

Re: UCX II experience

Sciss wrote:

> I see it as a failing of the Unix manufacturers / community that they have not managed to develop a desktop system that is attractive enough for both users and software developers to compete with Windows and Apple.

'splaining why Linux desktop is a failed company is entirely unhelpful, and sorry but I'm not reading this barrage of paragraphs. I suggest to get a life. Signed, happy Linux desktop user since seven years, formerly unhappy Mac user.

> If RME is not able to provide Linux support, the options are to tolerate the prevailing situation, try to get someone to develop open source support, or change the manufacturer. The world is what it is.

I would love to pick a different manufacturer. Any recommendations?

- MOTU: randomly works on Linux or not, they give a toss
- Focusrite: cheap enough that it mostly works, but then again not (had a major issue last week with my "trusted" Scarlett 18i20 suddenly messing up the
  alsa mixer and four analogue outputs missing, that was only resolved by improvising with the ADAT output)
- Behringer: so cheap they don't have a support; spend half a year getting my refund for a broken UMC, never again

Perhaps I'm missing something?

HNY

That's exactly the problem. Linux is actually a really good system. There are a lot of people who don't even want to think about it. They always come up with some excuse why Linux can't or shouldn't be supported.. However, it is already possible today. Anyone who says otherwise is attitudinal and wrong.

As for the equipment, what you describe is true. They work if they work and the user is responsible. It is said that Hell is a place where everything you want is at your fingertips, but if you are far enough away you will never be able to reach them. Sometimes it feels like Hell is run by commercial operators.

But still, we have hope. Time will take care of this.

Don't let this post ruin your day, we are in the same boat and I suffer from this too. But I'll still be making music on Linux as long as I can.

11 (edited by ramses 2023-01-03 20:01:33)

Re: UCX II experience

Whether you read this or not is of course entirely up to you. But when you post something in a forum, you have to expect replies. And here the same law applies to everyone and preferably on a factual level.

Many see the issue of Linux support only from the buyer's perspective and do not even know what expenses are behind it. I am used to think and work development oriented, so I have maybe a different view on things and wanted to share it here.

At the end of the day .. if RME thinks its about the time to release something officially for Linux, then they will do.
I am only telling you why I think it is not yet the case. And if you know the reasons, then you could possibly use this information to also tell other people that there is no benefit in having so many Linux distributions. Many people still think that this kind of "bazaar style" was a good idea.

Therefore, I have drawn a bow over the last 30-40 years of application development under Unix to show that standardization has always been an important and necessary topic. That's why I don't think many manufacturers are making any real progress when it comes to Linux.

You also always have to look at the background of a company. When it comes to software, we've often gotten used to the sometimes really lousy quality (but ok, "there's nothing else" or to this price). Or that companies simply perform changes "for the sake of change" in order to be able to release a new version every year to get money from customers.

Here in the recording area and especially from RME, the customers expect higher quality and that has to run on all systems that the customers use and even with Windows and Apple there can be annoying issues at times. It is also important to keep support costs within reasonable limits.

BR Ramses
UFX+, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub12Pro

12 (edited by sjzstudio 2023-01-03 14:04:01)

Re: UCX II experience

@ramses
Have you followed what has happened on the Linux side in terms of audio and video production in recent years?

What software and plugins are available nowadays. So I ask, do you think there is growth or recession there? What do you predict will happen in the next five years?

What do you think, e.g. Apple/Microsoft for privacy protection? Or when they change something ahead of their self-interest, it breaks so many things in many, many people's carefully optimized production equipment. What do you think about mandatory updates that can permanently break your system...

I don't mean to be rude. Interested in this topic more widely.

if you have that kind of background as a developer, I think you would be definitely welcome in the Linux audio community (I'm not a developer myself, but I think linuxaudio.org could be a good starting point). For example, to develop better standardization.

13 (edited by ramses 2023-01-03 20:06:03)

Re: UCX II experience

> I don't mean to be rude. Interested in this topic more widely.

Relax, it's all ok. The biggest problem for switching to Unix/Linux is, that too many applications are missing.
I use the system for Office Work, Gaming, Recording, etc. sometimes even virtualization.
I would have to use two different systems, frequent reboots and administration efforts would be too high.
With Windows, I would leave a platform that ran very well and in particular for recording since approx 17 years.
This is only possible if all needed applications would be available on the other platform.

Besides, my Windows system runs very well, all is nicely organized, including working backup and recovery strategies and what not. I want to avoid reinventing the wheel, as currently all runs so well.

It would be a massive effort doing a migration and to set up everything in the Unix way.

I require Unix as a solid foundation to work with. Not to satisfy any latent tinkering instinct. I require a mature platform on which all my applications run and which requires as little work as possible (-> system administration).

BR Ramses
UFX+, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub12Pro

14 (edited by sjzstudio 2023-01-03 20:46:07)

Re: UCX II experience

There is no point in discussing how good or bad Windows or Linux is. All the same things can be done with both systems. If Cubase is not Linux compatible, nothing can be done about it. It also doesn't mean that Linux is somehow bad.

But there are other people who use other programs that are fully compatible with Linux. Little by little, new operators are joining the group, and even at that stage a wider audio device support will happen.

There is also an attempt to oppose the spread of Linux. One such is Microsoft's Pluton chip, which aims to prevent the installation of any operating system other than Windows on the device. For some reason, newer motherboards have wanted to use them. Why? Whose right is it to decide what software you use on the device you own? Yours or Microsoft's?

In addition, the trend seems to be that Apple/MS can block the use of programs they don't like if they wish. Or remove them from the device completely, remotely, if they want.

What if in some situation they want to prevent your equipment from being used with your beloved RME? For some reason? For commercial or political or ideological reasons? Can you trust a party that tries to limit your freedoms. Create and do as you want, when you want... Unfortunately, the world is still not based on peace and love. Everything is about money and power.

Linux is perhaps unintentionally or intentionally spread over many distributions and development teams for a reason. It is not necessarily a weakness in this world situation in which we live. Maybe even that's a good thing.

I don't want any quarrel with this, just another angle's view on the matter and happy moments to everyone working with RME devices, whether you are a MAC, WIN or Linux geek.

Interesting stuff, for those who are interested in Linux audio:

https://discourse.ardour.org/t/ardour-2 … /102333/28
https://discourse.ardour.org/t/intervie … bin/108069

15 (edited by ramses 2023-01-03 21:13:23)

Re: UCX II experience

> What if in some situation they want to prevent your equipment from being used with your beloved RME?

Currently, Linux is no alternative, as many things do not run on it at all, and this is even worse.

You sound as if you misunderstand me. I am not against RME support for Linux.
I was only telling why I think that Linux is still not attractive enough as a platform and why I couldn't migrate to it.

BR Ramses
UFX+, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub12Pro