1 Topic by ramses (edited by ramses 2023-04-21 06:52:15)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,151

Topic: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

Hi, somebody had audio issues from Windows 10 sound system. I identified that the recording application didn't have the RME driver installed. After installing and using the RME ASIO driver the sound issues were gone and sound was much better according to customer.

Now the strange things, where I need your help.

I assumed now, as TotalMix FX will usually be installed by the ASIO driver, that he might have worked without TotalMix FX before. But the opposite is the case, he claims that he was using TotalMix FX before.

But how can that be? I thought, that you need a working ASIO driver for TM FX to work to communicate with the interface.

Or could that be related to the BBF Pro FS being in CC mode?

But also here I thought that CC mode means RME-driverless operation that Windows drivers kick in, and then I would think that TotalMix FX wouldn't work.

I doubt that he installed a TM FX release from forum.

Based on this information, whether TM FX needs ASIO driver or not or whether TM FX can work without driver and also with the device in CC more (or not) I would like to understand in what (possible insane) state his setup is because this person needs definitively help. He doesn't have his setup under control, even after spending years using it.

I tried already to test this with my UFX+, disabled MADIface driver in Autostart, but to my surprise, Cubase could still find and use the MADIface driver and sound was playing. How that, if I disabled MADIface driver in Autostart? At this point I decided not to change my setup any further and decided to ask a few things here.

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

2 Reply by MC

  • MC
  • MC
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Germany/Thailand
  • Registered: 2007-04-06
  • Posts: 24,902

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

1. TM FX does not need ASIO. You could install the driver, delete the asio.dlls and still use WDM and TM FX.

2. In CC mode there is no driver - TM FX needs the driver to communicate with the hardware.

3. When you disabled the driver in Autostart Windows found a new P&P device and immediately installed a driver from its repository again.

Was there really no ASIO driver installed - or the driver was there but ASIO not working? Remember the transition issues when we had to change the reg ASIO paths some time ago?

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

MC's Website

3 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2023-04-21 12:13:39)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,151

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

MC wrote:

1. TM FX does not need ASIO. You could install the driver, delete the asio.dlls and still use WDM and TM FX.

2. In CC mode there is no driver - TM FX needs the driver to communicate with the hardware.

3. When you disabled the driver in Autostart Windows found a new P&P device and immediately installed a driver from its repository again.

Was there really no ASIO driver installed - or the driver was there but ASIO not working? Remember the transition issues when we had to change the reg ASIO paths some time ago?

Thanks Matthias.

Two things I do not understand:

A) First you say in 1- "no driver needed for TM FX (and even WDM) to work", but then in 2- you say: "needs the driver to communicate with the hardware"

B) You say WDM would work without ASIO driver. But you mean if WDM devices were already enabled, right?
Because default is 0 WDM device and driver settings menue depends also on driver installation, correct?
You only wanted to point out here, that WDM works (once setup) even without the ASIO driver, I assume because the WDM drivers are dynamically created driver files that stay there also after removal of ASIO driver?

Regarding last comment about paths in registry. Interesting, sorry, either I didn't read or forgot about it.

Well .. I do not know exactly what happened on his system and I am not so convinced that he remembers correctly, therefor I was hunting for some facts to be able to extrapolate myself what could have happened to this system or .. whether something needs to be done or whether we are in safe harbour now.

My motivation for fixing it is simply, not having to hear about "bad news" which are related to a "bad setup".

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • From: Germany
  • Registered: 2007-04-10
  • Posts: 9,560

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

ramses wrote:

A) First you say in 1- "no driver needed for TM FX (and even WDM) to work", but then in 2- you say: "needs the driver to communicate with the hardware"

The hardware driver, but not ASIO specifically...


B) You say WDM would work without ASIO driver. But you mean if WDM devices were already enabled, right?
Because default is 0 WDM device and driver settings menue depends also on driver installation, correct?

The Settings Dialog is not the ASIO driver. It would also work without ASIO dlls. And WDM drivers are not files, and they are in no way dependant on ASIO.

PS: You can't disable the driver as such in the Autostart options, only the Settings and TMFX applications...

Regards
Daniel Fuchs
RME

RME Support's Website

5 Reply by MC

  • MC
  • MC
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Germany/Thailand
  • Registered: 2007-04-06
  • Posts: 24,902

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

ramses wrote:
MC wrote:

1. TM FX does not need ASIO. You could install the driver, delete the asio.dlls and still use WDM and TM FX.

A) First you say in 1- "no driver needed for TM FX (and even WDM) to work".

Nowhere did I say so.

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

MC's Website

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,151

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

RME Support wrote:
ramses wrote:

A) First you say in 1- "no driver needed for TM FX (and even WDM) to work", but then in 2- you say: "needs the driver to communicate with the hardware"

The hardware driver, but not ASIO specifically...


B) You say WDM would work without ASIO driver. But you mean if WDM devices were already enabled, right?
Because default is 0 WDM device and driver settings menue depends also on driver installation, correct?

The Settings Dialog is not the ASIO driver. It would also work without ASIO dlls. And WDM drivers are not files, and they are in no way dependant on ASIO.

PS: You can't disable the driver as such in the Autostart options, only the Settings and TMFX applications...

Thanks for explanation. I mistakenly assumed that the RME ASIO driver was a single DLL responsible for both hardware access and communication with the application via the ASIO protocol.

Matthias, now I understand what you mean and your response wink

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • rpnfan
  • AES/EBU artist
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2021-05-20
  • Posts: 114

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

MC wrote:

2. In CC mode there is no driver - TM FX needs the driver to communicate with the hardware.

The question was about Windows and in Windows CC mode is not supported -- at least not from the Babyface Pro FS. BTW, I still think that it is misleading to advertise it as class compliant, which is not true for the most used operating system!

To quote yourself from another thread:

MC wrote:

Der CC-Modus funktioniert nicht unter Windows (das geht nur mit ADI-2 DAC/Pro). Braucht auch niemand, für Windows gibt es schliesslich Treiber. CC-Modus läuft unter Mac, iOS und Linux.

  • Jeff
  • Jeff
  • Moderator
  • Offline
  • From: USA
  • Registered: 2007-05-21
  • Posts: 4,621

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

The question was about Windows and in Windows CC mode is not supported

Windows 10 release 1703 added UAC2 support, it's been present since then.

Regards,
Jeff Petersen
Synthax Inc.

Jeff's Website

9 Reply by rpnfan (edited by rpnfan 2023-04-22 21:09:13)

  • rpnfan
  • AES/EBU artist
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2021-05-20
  • Posts: 114

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

Jeff wrote:

The question was about Windows and in Windows CC mode is not supported

Windows 10 release 1703 added UAC2 support, it's been present since then.

Mmh, I bought my Babyface way after this Windows release and it does not work in CC mode for me. When I reported that in the forum the answer from MC was that it is not supposed to work under Windows (see my [german] quote from him).

I just retried to set the Babyface Pro FS to CC mode. When I do that, the device manager does show me an error and tells me that a driver (USB Audio 2.0) is already installed and no better driver is available. But at the same time the error message under the "General" tab lists 'This device can not start. (Code 10)'.

So I do not see how I could get CC mode working under Windows 10 or 11.

  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,007

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

rpnfan wrote:

The question was about Windows and in Windows CC mode is not supported -- at least not from the Babyface Pro FS. BTW, I still think that it is misleading to advertise it as class compliant, which is not true for the most used operating system

Nothing misleading there - the RME interfaces like Babyface and some of the Fireface series are advertised to have a class compliant mode, not to be class compliant units per se! They also have a native driver mode which gives you some important advantages (for ex. the flexibility with TotalMix and better latency times).
That’s unlike other units (for example Sounddevices Mixpre series or Zoom U-24/U-44) which only have one operating mode which is the cc mode. They work on iOS devices and also without any driver installation on Mac computers. But on Windows there is always a separate driver installation needed for such units. What for should it be then to offer a second - 'cc' - Windows driver for an interface like Babyface (pro/FS), UCX, UFX?

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2
  • mkok
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2020-11-04
  • Posts: 598

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

Not sure why anyone would want to use cc mode on windows.

Babyface Pro Fs, Behringer ADA8200, win 10/11 PCs, Cubase/Wavelab, Adam A7X monitors.
  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,007

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

mkok wrote:

Not sure why anyone would want to use cc mode on windows.

Yes…???
RME clearly states, the main reason for cc mode is the use of the interface on an iPad. The differences and (dis)advantages (on macOS) between native driver mode and cc mode are described in the user manual.

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2

13 Reply by rpnfan (edited by rpnfan 2023-04-23 15:08:44)

  • rpnfan
  • AES/EBU artist
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2021-05-20
  • Posts: 114

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

oli77sch wrote:
rpnfan wrote:

The question was about Windows and in Windows CC mode is not supported -- at least not from the Babyface Pro FS. BTW, I still think that it is misleading to advertise it as class compliant, which is not true for the most used operating system

Nothing misleading there - the RME interfaces like Babyface and some of the Fireface series are advertised to have a class compliant mode, not to be class compliant units per se! They also have a native driver mode which gives you some important advantages (for ex. the flexibility with TotalMix and better latency times).

Funny how people seem to defend RME, even when things are not like advertised or could be improved (like the UI of Totalmix, scaling of Digicheck, option to display and control levels without TM window, extended EQ, Loudness in TM...). RME does many things good or even great, but there are also areas for improvement (mainly S/W wise) or in some cases clearer communication.

And what would it mean to have a class compliant mode, without being class compliant!? Sorry, that does not make any sense. Either it is class compliant, which means every OS supporting that can make use of the device, or it is not.

The BFP is advertised as class compliant (see the logo at the BFP page) -- which it is not fully. Even in the manual it is not totally clear that Windows is not supported. At least that was so about 2 years ago when I bought the interface. I have not checked if the manual was updated in the mean time. Also when other interfaces are advertised as well as class compliant (ADI-2) and also work as such with Windows. So surely this is misleading.

How important the lack of being really class compliant is a second question. I would like CC mode for Windows to be able to connect it to any Win computer without having to install drivers there. Another benefit would be that the device could be used for many years, because there is no need for a dedicated driver. The last argument is in this case luckily not relevant as long as RME keeps publishing drivers for current (and old) operating systems. Which was one of the reasons to choose for RME. I do not regret that decision, but lost many hours due some missing information and non-helpful (it was partly wrong!) input from the RME support, when I posted my problems. RME can and should be proud of what they offer, but IMO they also should be more open to see where things can be improved and also recognize that RME has many non-pro users, who will not know some things which may be totally self-speaking for an audio pro. And sometimes (not always!) it is just the "tone" which could be more customer-centric or in some cases "humble".

  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,007

Re: Babyface Pro FS: a few questions about driver and TM FX prerequisites

rpnfan wrote:

Funny how people seem to defend RME, even when things are not like advertised or could be improved (like the UI of Totalmix, scaling of Digicheck, option to display and control levels without TM window, extended EQ, Loudness in TM...). RME does many things good or even great, but there are also areas for improvement (mainly S/W wise) or in some cases clearer communication.

Ok, nothing against that from my side.

rpnfan wrote:

And what would it mean to have a class compliant mode, without being class compliant!? Sorry, that does not make any sense. Either it is class compliant, which means every OS supporting that can make use of the device, or it is not.

Well, I’m still sure the Babyface pro fulfills the cc specs. It even worked on my previous Android based smartphone (I have an iPhone now). Honestly I don’t remember what exactly the recording session was, but it went well using the two mic inputs to record something into Audio Evolution DAW and monitor the signals. Honestly I never plugged it in a Windows PC at all. And I’m with you regarding the statements about cc mode and Windows in the manual, it’s really not entirely clear.

rpnfan wrote:

The BFP is advertised as class compliant (see the logo at the BFP page) -- which it is not fully.

No, not on the current website but indeed on the old one which still is accessible. Sorry, I didn’t know this before. At least RME made a correction here (on the current product site of the BF pro FS there is the logo with smartphone, tablet and laptop and the remark 'class compliant mode')

rpnfan wrote:

How important the lack of being really class compliant is a second question. I would like CC mode for Windows to be able to connect it to any Win computer without having to install drivers there.

Ok, fair

rpnfan wrote:

Another benefit would be that the device could be used for many years, because there is no need for a dedicated driver. The last argument is in this case luckily not relevant as long as RME keeps publishing drivers for current (and old) operating systems. Which was one of the reasons to choose for RME. I do not regret that decision, but lost many hours due some missing information and non-helpful (it was partly wrong!) input from the RME support, when I posted my problems. RME can and should be proud of what they offer, but IMO they also should be more open to see where things can be improved and also recognize that RME has many non-pro users, who will not know some things which may be totally self-speaking for an audio pro. And sometimes (not always!) it is just the "tone" which could be more customer-centric or in some cases "humble".

I don’t have much personal experience here. I only asked once about updating the firmware on my very old original ADI-2. The answer was short but friendly. But yes, building pro level equipment, maybe the RME staff assumes customers with at least basic knowledge. But anyway of course that should not be an excuse for an unfriendly „tone“.

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2