• TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Topic: Which USB interface?

I'm wondering what usb interface I should get. My needs are:

Good RTL (is the madiface driver better for this than the older usb one?);

Good headphone amp and bus powered would be useful for mobile use.

I have a Metric Halo ULN-2 and it's great, but it doesn't have Windows drivers, though it is class compliant. I also often use a Neve 1073dpd, so aes/spdif/adat is required. I could connect something to the ULN-2 (Digiface USB), though a single interface might be better. Weighing the options I have:

Babyface pro FS: FS clock, great thd and s/n, older usb driver (worse the madiface ones?)

Digiface USB: Would use alongside ULN-2, worse headphone specs, no FS clock, lowest cost, madiface driver

Digiface AES: FS clock, best specs, has everything I need, Madiface driver (better?), most expensive by far.

Any advice would be helpful. I might be missing something. Thanks.

2 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2023-09-26 08:52:37)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,137

Re: Which USB interface?

Hi Tom,

MADIface driver supports down to 32 samples, usb driver 48 samples at single speed.
The difference in terms of RTL is low, see RTL for some products using the link below.
Note: the old UFX had the USB driver, these entries you can use to compare with UFX+/UFX III.
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ent … cts-en-de/

If you should need the pitch function, only supported by the USB driver.

You can use my Excel comparison sheet for further comparisons:
https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=35156

As the Digiface AES costs around €2000 you could also consider getting other recording interfaces.

If the type/amount of ports would be sufficient, e.g. UCX II which has nice preamps up to 75db gain and DURec, by this you would even save some money.
Similar with 802 FS, but the question is whether you like the analog knobs on the mic inputs. I prefer the other recording interfaces where you can save the settings in TotalMix FX "snapshots" to easily save/recall them.

An alternative would be to look directly to the flagship interfaces like e.g. UFX II.

Or even UFX III with MADI which got some nice additional features, see Excel and this blog article:
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ent … iii-en-de/

MADI gives you many options to connect devices and also in terms of possible cable lengths, more freedom in placement of additional devices, e.g. to split them across rooms. Bigger investment, I know, but should your demand grow you have with it the best possibilities to grow without having to invest into a new device. You need do look / consider on your own ... I do not know your current and future demands and whether it would fit budget wise.

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

3 Reply by vinark (edited by vinark 2023-09-26 08:59:24)

  • vinark
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2009-06-05
  • Posts: 2,665

Re: Which USB interface?

Good round trip latency is mostly dependent on your PC, with RME: wich motherboard cpu drivers and optimisations, not which RME driver type. I have both PCI (theoretically best) and usb driver based RME (HDSP and Babyface pro fs) and they perform exactly the same, so I would get the RME interface that best fits your (future) needs.
BTW babyface pro FS is great for me

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
BFpro fs, 2X HDSP9652 ADI-8AE, 2X HDSP9632

4 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2023-09-26 09:29:01)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,137

Re: Which USB interface?

Really? Now I am confused. PLease help me how you mean that.
Good round trip latency is IMHO not dependend on the PC.

It depends on
- ASIO buffersize (where the small difference between 32 and 48 samples is neglectable)
- Converter latency (much much lower compared to latency caused by ASIO buffersizes, esp higher ones)
- driver quality and how many safety buffers

The PC can have good or bad drivers, thus higher or lower DPC, which gives you more or less headroom to use lower ASIO buffersizes for a given project.
If ASIO buffersize is too low for the project/ASIO load or when cpu cores are blocked by bad drivers (DPC latencies), then you get not more latency but audio drops if the PC is not fast enough to process audio in time.

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

5 Reply by vinark (edited by vinark 2023-09-26 11:28:17)

  • vinark
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2009-06-05
  • Posts: 2,665

Re: Which USB interface?

Hi Ramses,
I should have said if good low latency is achievable is dependent on the PC. How low this latency is exactly depends on chosen buffer size  and converter latency. But with the same buffer sizes on RME interfaces, difference because of converter latency are small. Depends on what the OP means: I want to get reliable low buffers or the lowest latency on a specific buffer. IOW I want sub 5ms latency (or any other value) or I want to squeeze every 0.1 ms difference out of it.

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
BFpro fs, 2X HDSP9652 ADI-8AE, 2X HDSP9632

6 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2023-09-26 12:04:56)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,137

Re: Which USB interface?

Thanks for clarifying.
BTW I use mostly 128 samples buffer for normal operation and gaming.
When playing a virtual amp and recording then I use mostly 64 samples.
32 samples is possible but I want some reserves.
A real delay when playing through a virtual amp I feel at 256 samples (13.x ms RTL).
But with everything below 10ms (32..128 samples) I am fine.

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

As I will be using it with a slightly older laptop for now, I wouldn't want it to struggle too much with low buffer settings. But if the computer specs don't affect the latency much, then the older driver seems to have only slightly worse latency that I don't think would be enough to make me choose the Digiface AES over the Babyface. I would prefer to go for a bus powered one and a smaller form factor, so not the ufx III. I hadn't really looked at the ucx II much as the Babyface seemed to have better specs, but that might be an option. As long as there's no significant downside to using the old drivers, I might choose ufx II or Babyface.

  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

I currently use the 1073dpd as the master clock when recording with it, and it sends the word lock over separate BNC. I notice the ucx II had BNC, the Babyface doesn't. Would sending the clock over AES with the audio (converted to toslink with a converter I have) to the Babyface be fine? If the Digiface AES was a little cheaper, I'd choose that, as it measures better, has exactly what I need, uses the newer driver. But I don't think I can justify it when the Babyface is half the price. Sorry, last question, and really appreciate the help, would the Babyface work fine with Sennheiser HD280 pro 64 ohms headphones which I use quite a lot? The Babyface has 0.1 and 10 ohm phones outputs, the Digiface AES has one 5 ohm, which seems a better fit.

  • vinark
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2009-06-05
  • Posts: 2,665

Re: Which USB interface?

Yes the converter should work. You could also connect the neve through the analog ins of a Babyface. It will not matter if you do the conversion in the neve or in the baby, as long as you don't do multiple conversions.

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
BFpro fs, 2X HDSP9652 ADI-8AE, 2X HDSP9632
  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

TomVY wrote:

Would sending the clock over AES with the audio (converted to toslink with a converter I have) to the Babyface be fine?

Not sure. To my knowledge it would have to be SPDIF (consumer format), not AES/EBU (professional format).

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2
  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

I have 2 converters (Hosa CDL-313 and Lindy spdif/toslink converter) which should work for plugging the Neve into the Babyface (AES to toslink). I'm sure that will work. I just wasn't sure if there's any difference if sending the word lock separately. Babyface also has quite a nice form factor when using with a laptop I think.

  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

Ah yes, with this two converters it should work. I was wrong anyway, according to the manual:
27.4 Digital Inputs
...
SPDIF optical
- 1 x optical, according to IEC 60958
- Accepts Consumer and Professional format
- Lock Range: 27 kHz – 200 kHz
- Jitter suppression: > 50 dB (2.4 kHz)

And with SteadyClock FS on the Babyface pro you will have a nice and clean digital audio signal from the Neve.

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

13 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2023-09-26 19:38:30)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,137

Re: Which USB interface?

TomVY wrote:

I have 2 converters (Hosa CDL-313 and Lindy spdif/toslink converter) which should work for plugging the Neve into the Babyface (AES to toslink). I'm sure that will work. I just wasn't sure if there's any difference if sending the word lock separately. Babyface also has quite a nice form factor when using with a laptop I think.

If budget allows I would recommend you to take a closer look at the new UCX II.
I also has a nice form factor (but low energy consumption - to be able to work USB bus powered - was not the major design goal). So it is more like the "little brother of UFX II":
- 8x analog I/O
- 2x XLR/TRS Mic/Inst/Line (Mic inputs with 75 dB gain)
- 2x Line/Inst input
- 2x Phones output (stronger than BBF, 210 mW vs 90 mW)
- 1x AES I/O
- 1x ADAT I/O
- 1x SPDIF (coax)
- 1x MIDI
- Word Clock
- Full implementation of FX chip
- DURec (Direct USB Recording like the flagship interfaces UFX II/+/III)
- Autoset
- ...

See also this orum thread about the UCX II: https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=33222

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

Is there an advantage to using a PSU apart from a more powerful headphone amp? Does it change the sound quality? The ucx II looks good, but I don't need so many analog channels and not sure I would use DURec. So if the Babyface running from bus power means some quality is compromised, I would lean towards the ucx II.

  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

The Babyface also seems to support FX in Totalmix like the ufx II.

16 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2023-09-26 21:34:13)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,137

Re: Which USB interface?

TomVY wrote:

Is there an advantage to using a PSU apart from a more powerful headphone amp? Does it change the sound quality? The ucx II looks good, but I don't need so many analog channels and not sure I would use DURec. So if the Babyface running from bus power means some quality is compromised, I would lean towards the ucx II.

Compare the values / features in the Excel.

The UCX II has definitively the Mic Inputs with higher gain.
The more powerful headphone outputs can driver headphones with higher impedance.
DURec is very useful to have the possibility for backup recordings in addition to the DAW or to simply be used as a tape deck.
The effect section in the BBF Pro is different. The UCX II has a full implementation of FX by an additional FX chip inside.
BBF Pro: FX effects (dynamics/reverbs) are rendered on PC via driver.

Don't get me wrong, the BBF Pro FS is an excellent interface. But it has been designed for mobile use, therefore some tradeoffs / compromises. The UCX II (successor of the UCX) got many useful things from the flagship interface and as it has not been designed for mobile use, it offers more ports, features and has a more powerful analog section.
So it depends, what features are most important for you .. more mobility/lower price or more power/performance features.
A small form factor applies to both.
UCX II you can even expand later with an ADI-2 Pro via AES, but still have one ADAT port free for preamp or converter.

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

ramses wrote:

The effect section in the BBF Pro is different. The UCX II has a full implementation of FX by an additional FX chip inside.
BBF Pro: FX effects (dynamics/reverbs) are rendered on PC via driver.

Little but important correction here: there are no dynamics at all with the BBFproFS. Reverb and echo are rendered on the host computer cpu.

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2
  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,137

Re: Which USB interface?

oli77sch wrote:
ramses wrote:

The effect section in the BBF Pro is different. The UCX II has a full implementation of FX by an additional FX chip inside.
BBF Pro: FX effects (dynamics/reverbs) are rendered on PC via driver.

Little but important correction here: there are no dynamics at all with the BBFproFS. Reverb and echo are rendered on the host computer cpu.

Thanks for this clarification. Will correct it in the Excel soon. I am not certain how this came in.

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

19 Reply by oli77sch (edited by oli77sch 2023-09-26 22:40:59)

  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

TomVY wrote:

So if the Babyface running from bus power means some quality is compromised, I would lean towards the ucx II.

No audio quality compromise at all. BBFproFS is excellent.

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2
  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

The Excel chart is very useful, thanks. I think the Digiface AES should show Madiface as driver, not usb. The ufx II having better preamps doesn't matter as much for my use as I usually use the Neve preamps.

What is the difference between the two drivers, is one a different usb implementation and is it better?

21 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2023-09-27 07:12:41)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,137

Re: Which USB interface?

oli77sch wrote:
TomVY wrote:

So if the Babyface running from bus power means some quality is compromised, I would lean towards the ucx II.

No audio quality compromise at all. BBFproFS is excellent.

Yep.
The thing is, that the USB2 bus has only a certain power that it can deliver.

So you can only put a certain amount of circuits ("energy consumers") into such a device.
Or you can only implement headphone outputs with a certain more limited power compared to recording interfaces with a power supply. For headphones with normal impedance the BBF Pro has sufficient power.

What has been implemented into the BBF Pro FS are high quality components and the sound is not degraded in any way.
But you can not pack more into the device, because it has an optional PSU, because it needs to run reliably on USB2 and then you can implement what can be powered by USB2. But it is indeed nice, that you can connect an optional  PSU just for the case that your laptop doesn't deliver USB power well, to be able to exclude any potential problem in that area.

There are only certain things for which USB does not deliver enough power, it has been mentioned already in this thread.
For example:
- no FX chip
- weaker headphone outputs, still well but weaker compared to the other RME recording interfaces like UCX II, UFX II, ...
- not so much gain on the Mic inputs, but still well compared to most devices of the competition

I regard it as an advantage to have Mic inputs in the device. If you want to take it with you, then you do not need to carry the external preamps necessarily as well and it is also good as reference, how transparent mic inputs sound compared to others which might have some color.

I wouldn't recommend buying too small, your demand might increase over time and buying an RME interface is not like with consumer devices, that you buy it for 3-5 years, you have such a long driver support, that it is much likely that you will have it much much longer, see how long Fireface 400 and 800 are being sold on used market.

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

22 Reply by oli77sch (edited by oli77sch 2023-09-28 21:54:17)

  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

TomVY wrote:

What is the difference between the two drivers, is one a different usb implementation and is it better?

I don’t know the difference, but for sure there is not a 'better' and a 'worse' one - for what reason should RME offer drivers in different qualities? Also the two months difference (July / September) between the release of the two Windows drivers are not related to the driver quality.
I have a Babyface pro (USB series driver) and a Digiface USB (MADIface driver) and both the units run equally well on both my Macs (an old Intel MacBook and a new M1 mini, so completely different driver versions).
EDIT!! What am I telling here? On Mac, both BBFpro and Digiface USB use the same driver. Sorry, I was confused, only for Windows there are different drivers!

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2
  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

It would be nice to know what the differences are between the two drivers. I can't find any information about it, but since you have both drivers and they run equally well, that's reassuring. With regard to the UCX II having more powerful preamps, it would be nice to have, but not essential for me. I often use a Neumann U87 ai, which doesn't need too much gain anyway. I don't really need extra FX in Totalmix. If recording a vocalist for example, I can always just use reverb from the daw (latency will be a nice pre-delay). The weaker headphone output should be fine also, as I often just use my trust HD280 pros, but might get some HD650s later. But I don't listen at high volumes much and I don't want to have to turn the digital volume down too much and lose resolution.

The Excel chart shows the UCX II is 'compatible' with usb3. What does this mean? It still runs at USB2 speed doesn't it? And for the ouput levels, shouldn't the Babyface also have +4dBu, as I think it has a switch for this?

  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

ramses wrote:

… But it is indeed nice, that you can connect an optional  PSU just for the case that your laptop doesn't deliver USB power well, to be able to exclude any potential problem in that area.

Beside that, the optional PSU is needed for the use on an iPad (class compliant mode) or as a standalone device.

ramses wrote:

…
- weaker headphone outputs, still well but weaker compared to the other RME recording interfaces like UCX II, UFX II, ...
- not so much gain on the Mic inputs, but still well compared to most devices of the competition

My Beyer DT-770 250 Ohm headphones work well on the Babyface pro (I have the older model). And the mic gain even is ok to use some ribbon mics.
So this is kind of 'luxus discussion'…

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2
  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

TomVY wrote:

… If recording a vocalist for example, I can always just use reverb from the daw (latency will be a nice pre-delay)…

By the way: https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.ph … 46#p195946
Beside that, there are reverb and echo available with the BBFproFS, but not processed on the device itself.

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2
  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

I will need to get my head around Totalmix. Might have to read the manual :-O. I actually have a very old hdsp 9652 pci card, though it's used for something else at the moment, and I want something to use with a laptop. But that has Totalmix, and I used to use that, but never really bothered to understand it as I used a Spirit 328 mixer for reverb then. But it's amazing that this old card still works great on Windows and has really low latency. It looks like the Babyface is winning me over. I should also give a shout-out to Metric Halo. The ULN-2 is amazing too, and the ability to keep upgrading it is great. Less waste. But I want to move away from pentiometers and it doesn't have Windows drivers.

  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

Yes, to read the manual (at least the section about TotalMix) is a good idea. There are also some videos about it on YouTube (from RME).

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2
  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,137

Re: Which USB interface?

oli77sch wrote:

And the mic gain even is ok to use some ribbon mics.
So this is kind of 'luxus discussion'…

It might work for you but not for others.
I need some of this extra gain when doing silent recording with levels around 70-75 dB.

It is not a luxury discussion, the question is how flexible you want or need to be with your gear.

And if I am not mistaken I told about the advantages about flexibility, not to buy too small, because nobody knows what you are doing in a few months or years. Like me, of all sudden nearly all of my analog I/O are in use.

Final decision -> requester.

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

ramses wrote:
oli77sch wrote:

And the mic gain even is ok to use some ribbon mics.
So this is kind of 'luxus discussion'…

It might work for you but not for others.
I need some of this extra gain when doing silent recording with levels around 70-75 dB.

It is not a luxury discussion, the question is how flexible you want or need to be with your gear.

And if I am not mistaken I told about the advantages about flexibility, not to buy too small, because nobody knows what you are doing in a few months or years. Like me, of all sudden nearly all of my analog I/O are in use.

Final decision -> requester.

Of course 'luxury', not 'luxus' smile
Yes, it’s about flexibility but also about what is possible with a particular device. My intention was to make clear, the BBFproFS can handle many scenarios very well on highest quality. It seemed to me, the requester (TomVY) had some doubts first.

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2
  • Registered: 2022-03-22
  • Posts: 27

Re: Which USB interface?

Just wanted to say thanks to oli and ramses for their contribution into this thread, and others.

(I'm looking into whether to upgrade my Digiface USB to a setup that has either just UCX II, or Digiface USB+ADI-2* - was going to make my own thread but there's so much information on all these options already on the forum smile ).

31 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2023-09-27 14:54:55)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,137

Re: Which USB interface?

Yearofthegoat wrote:

Just wanted to say thanks to oli and ramses for their contribution into this thread, and others.

(I'm looking into whether to upgrade my Digiface USB to a setup that has either just UCX II, or Digiface USB+ADI-2* - was going to make my own thread but there's so much information on all these options already on the forum smile ).

Nice to hear, am glad that it helped.

Of course, it depends on your demands ..
The Digiface USB with its four ADAT ports (which are all switchable to optical SPDIF) is predestinated to connec additional converters and/or mic preamps.
You can of course add an ADI-2 DAC or Pro or ADI-2/4 Pro SE to it via ADAT or SPDIF.

But the Digiface USB is kind of entry level interface for such purposes.

A more complete selection/type of ports for a professional environment is being offered by the RayDAT PCIe card.
Which is a pure digital card, but not only with 4x ADAT (where 1 ports is switchable to optical SPDIF), it has a selection of many useful additional port types
- AES
- 2x MIDI
- SPDIF
- optional WC module
So you can e.g. connect an ADI-2 Pro via AES and have still 4x ADAT I/O to connect 8-port Preamps and/or ADDA converter up to double speed (88.2/96 kHz).

The UCX II has its advantages to have another good selection of port types.
It has an AES port e.g. for an ADI-2 Pro or ADI-2/4 Pro SE.
Also very nice features like analog ports, DURec, Autoset, two nice preamps compareable to UFX II.
But  if you would like to connect more devices, it has only 1 ADAT port.
Allows only to add one 8-port preamp and in double speed (if this is a topic for you) you would get only 4 channels.

So ... combination of RayDAT and ADI-2 Pro will surely be fantastic, but then you need a PCIe port free and 1-2 more sockets for the 2nd module and the optical WC module.

Another option, if UCX II with its selections of port and 1x AES and 1x ADAT is well, go for it ..
Add an ADI-2 Pro when at any point later if you would like to have it because of its unique feature set.

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • Kubrak
  • S/Mux specialist
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-08-03
  • Posts: 285

Re: Which USB interface?

PCI card is not IMHO very convenient for "mobile" setup. Well, one could have rack size computer and have all the gear in one rack, or more.....

Digiface USB may be entry model, but it works fine. Just it does not work standalone (unless one uses workaround) and does not have effects. If I am not mistaken even not via computer in TotalMix (maybe it has global effects, I have never tried). I do like DF USB. I use it to glue together different pieces of gear. Sort of inteligent patch bay, so I do not use it to have 4x8 inputs, I use it to add 8 channels to FF 802, or UCX from three others units.

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,137

Re: Which USB interface?

Kubrak wrote:

PCI card is not IMHO very convenient for "mobile" setup. Well, one could have rack size computer and have all the gear in one rack, or more.....

Digiface USB may be an entry model, but it works fine. Just, it does not work standalone (unless one uses a workaround) and does not have effects. If I am not mistaken, even not via computer in TotalMix (maybe it has global effects, I have never tried). I do like DF USB. I use it to glue together different pieces of gear. Sort of intelligent patch bay, so I do not use it to have 4×8 inputs, I use it to add 8 channels to FF 802, or UCX from three other units.

Regarding entry model … The point I wanted to make is, it has nothing but 4x ADAT I/O and a phones output.
For some applications, surely fine.

But it has nothing on top which might be useful or even be required like e.g. WC, MIDI [different port types].
If you are confident that you need nothing more,  ok, no problem.
In all other cases, better double-check the options: RayDAT (PCIe), UCX II (USB2), 802 FS (USB2), UFX II (USB2).

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

34 Reply by oli77sch (edited by oli77sch 2023-09-28 11:20:00)

  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

ramses wrote:

But the Digiface USB is kind of entry level interface for such purposes.

Kubrak wrote:

Digiface USB may be entry model

That's definitely not my opinion. I would rather call it a unit for specific use cases. I can imagine, the RME developer team had very concrete plans for it. Looking at the RME product range, I clearly see the Digiface USB as computer interface for up to four ADI-8 (QS) or maybe M-16/M-32 AD or DA converters or also XTC preamps. Of course it can also be used to connect some other ADAT or SPDIF converters. But keep in mind it has no word clock i/o. That means, the developer previewed connected units with both, ADAT inputs and outputs. Otherwise it becomes difficult to synchronise all devices together.

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

35 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2023-09-28 11:35:33)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,137

Re: Which USB interface?

oli77sch wrote:
ramses wrote:

But the Digiface USB is kind of entry level interface for such purposes.

Kubrak wrote:

Digiface USB may be entry model

That's definitely not my opinion. I would rather call it a unit for specific use cases. I can imagine, the RME developer team had very concrete plans for it. Looking at the RME product range, I clearly see the Digiface USB as computer interface for up to four ADI-8 (QS) or maybe M-16/M-32 AD or DA converters. Of course it can also be used to connect some other ADAT or SPDIF converters. But keep in mind it has no word clock i/o. That means, the developer previewed connected units with both, ADAT inputs and outputs. Otherwise it becomes difficult to synchronise all devices together.

Sorry, but why are you citing old statements of mine? I clarified already in the posting #33 above "Regarding entry model: ..." wink
Maybe lets better wait, whether the original poster has some questions left.

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • Registered: 2022-03-22
  • Posts: 27

Re: Which USB interface?

^^^
Yes. It's useful to see what decisions others make, and why.

  • Kubrak
  • S/Mux specialist
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-08-03
  • Posts: 285

Re: Which USB interface?

By "entry" I meant, that it has reduced set of connection possibilities, no standalone properties and output power of headphones is lower than most of other interfaces and no FX chip.

Otherwise it is great build quality and works great.

I use it to glue audiointerfaces and Eventide effects. I may route signals as desired.

Concerning clocking.... One might use just ADAT inputs  of DB USB if other gear does not have ADAT input (to get clocking from DB) and clock DB from one of them. And synchronise the rest of gear using WC. I have never tried, I just think, it might work.

It is a pitty that DF USB does not store at least last used routing setup (I know there is no memory to do it... :-( ) or at least that inputs are not routed to respective outputs (it skould be IMHO possible by updating firmware, but RME says it is not possible).

38 Reply by oli77sch (edited by oli77sch 2023-09-28 14:33:46)

  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

I of course can see what both of you, ramses and Kubrak meant by saying 'entry level'. It wasn't my intention to criticise you both - sorry for this. But in my personal opinion, it's really not the right description. Thinking on unexperienced users reading posts in this forum, it could give a false impression of the Digiface USB. In my eyes it's a 'specialist'. The same I think about the Babyface pro (FS), a 'specialist' which can be just the right thing for some users purposes.

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2
  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

Kubrak wrote:

Concerning clocking.... One might use just ADAT inputs  of DB USB if other gear does not have ADAT input (to get clocking from DB) and clock DB from one of them. And synchronise the rest of gear using WC. I have never tried, I just think, it might work.

At the moment I have a set up in use with the Digiface USB as interface, three different 8-channel mic preamps and my Fireface 400 connected to the four ADAT input ports. Two of the Preamps don't have an ADAT input, so it's not possible to have the DF USB as master, at least not in a simple way. But all the four input devices have WC in. I have a WC generator from Black Lion Audio, but this one only has three WC output connectors. Two cables go directly to two of the preamps. The third one goes to the FF400 WC in and from there a fourth WC cable goes to the third preamp. That works fine. But I would prefer to have the DF USB as master, so I have to try once what you write. I'm always unsure if the clock signal is passed thru a device or not (from ADAT in to WC out for example).

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

40 Reply by TomVY (edited by TomVY 2023-09-29 08:59:12)

  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

I've pretty much decided on the Babyface. It has FS clock, which I would like (rules out Digiface USB connected to uln-2). The uln-2 clock is excellent, but for mobile use I wouldn't have that clock, and the Digiface headphone output is not as good as Babyface. I already have AES to toslink adapters, so I can connect AES to the Babyface. It has less ports than ucx II, but I only need one input and output. If I need more I can add a Digiface USB. The preamps in the ucx II might be slightly better, but I wouldn't use them enough for it to be a major factor. I use the Neve preamp mostly. The extra things the ucx II has like usb recording, auto set, more outputs, word clock are all unnecessary for my use. I prefer the form factor of the Babyface for mobile use. I actually think the xlr's not locking might be better, as I can then disconnect it more easily when I want to take it out of the studio setup to use somewhere else. I don't need the colour display, though it might have been slightly useful. But it uses more energy. Babyface uses less. Better for bills and planet. I won't be playing stuff ear bleedingly loud in headphones, so don't need the extra power. I will at some point upgrade to digital monitors, most likely the kh120 IIs. So will just use toslink and converter for that. Running on bus power means it's more portable, and I would like to be able to use it on a train for example. The Digiface AES looks great, but the form factor is less appropriate for my use, and it is a lot more expensive, so not worth it.

The only thing that's really a negative for the Babyface compared with the Digiface AES is the older driver. I still don't know why the Digiface AES (bus powered usb) and the Babyface Pro FS use different drivers. No-one has given me an answer on that. I think until I get an answer to that I will hold off on buying it just yet. Hopefully I'll get an answer soon though :-)

  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

TomVY wrote:

The only thing that's really a negative for the Babyface compared with the Digiface AES is the older driver. I still don't know why the Digiface AES (bus powered usb) and the Babyface Pro FS use different drivers. No-one has given me an answer on that. I think until I get an answer to that I will hold off on buying it just yet. Hopefully I'll get an answer soon though :-)

You can be 100% sure: it’s not a quality question! RME updates its drivers for different reasons from time to time. When one driver still dates from July, there was no reason to publish a new one since then. I still use my trusty Fireface400 on my Mac computers. The newest driver I can get for it is from 2021 (and the firmware from 2012)! But this device works absolutely fine.

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2
  • vinark
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2009-06-05
  • Posts: 2,665

Re: Which USB interface?

The drivers models are different in how many channels they support and the way they achieve that. There is no latency performance difference. The newer driver squeezes more channels into usb then was possible with the what you call older one. But they are both current and updated.

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
BFpro fs, 2X HDSP9652 ADI-8AE, 2X HDSP9632
  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

I thought the difference might be to do with bandwidth, but the Digiface AES doesn't have lots of channels but still uses the madiface driver. That's why there must be more to it. I would think any future usb interfaces will now use the madiface driver. So it's partly a concern about latency, but also about future proofing.

But I know the Babyface Pro FS RTL is superb. Do I won't worry about driver versions and just be confident that rme write great drivers. And considering I can still get a driver for the Babyface for Windows xp, it seems pretty future proof. Even if the latency of madiface Vs usb is 0.5 ms, that's not actually that significant anyway. Thanks for you insight

  • Registered: 2016-06-14
  • Posts: 1,002

Re: Which USB interface?

BTW that’s interesting: https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/rme-digiface-aes

FF 400 - Babyface pro - Digiface USB - ADI-2 (original)
Mac mini M1 - Macbook pro - iPad Air2
  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

Yea I've read that, not the whole thing though as I don't have a subscription

46 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2023-09-29 15:47:04)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Online
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,137

Re: Which USB interface?

TomVY wrote:

I thought the difference might be to do with bandwidth, but the Digiface AES doesn't have lots of channels but still uses the madiface driver. That's why there must be more to it. I would think any future usb interfaces will now use the madiface driver. So it's partly a concern about latency, but also about future proofing.

But I know the Babyface Pro FS RTL is superb. Do I won't worry about driver versions and just be confident that rme write great drivers. And considering I can still get a driver for the Babyface for Windows xp, it seems pretty future proof. Even if the latency of madiface Vs usb is 0.5 ms, that's not actually that significant anyway. Thanks for you insight

I think the intention was for the following operational reason:

If a customer has already an UCX and gets the new UCX II, then he can access both interfaces with the same "old" usb driver.

In contrast to that, the Digiface AES is an entirely new interface, therefore the MADIface USB driver has been used. No need for backward compatibility for a possibly existing older model.

For the UFX+/ UFX III, UFX II and the older UFX a slightly different story...

UFX+ and UFX III have a much higher channel count and need the USB transfer modes being used in the MADIface driver for this reason.

The UFX+ was delivered before the UFX II. So the UFX II might have got the MADIface driver as well, to be more equal to the UFX+.

As you could see from my blog article that all drivers are on par RTL-wise … there is no better or worse driver.

Therefore, simply use the device which gives you most benefits for now and the future and do not buy too small.

Another tip: if BBF Pro, look that you get cables with angled plus, otherwise the cables to the left and right might disturb on the desk if you do not have much room. There are also TOSLINK cables available with angled plugs, but I don't know about the quality or whether they might dampen the signal because of the 90° angle (for TOSLINK cable length within the specs (<10m) most likely no issue).

https://www.amazona.de/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/rme-babyface-pro-fs-octobaby.jpg

Here at least an angled USB cable on left side:

https://www.lowbeats.de/site/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2016-06-rme-babyface-pro-livegig.jpg

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

Ok the backward compatibility makes sense. Yea the wires coming out left right and centre could be a bit messy. But when using it 'on the road' I'll mostly just have headphones and usb plugged in, and when on my desk, i'll at most have 2 phones, 2 optical, usb, DC and 2 XLR. I'll use midiman for midi. Still quite a few cables, but there's quite a lot of space on the desk, so not a problem for me. But thanks for highlighting the potential for it being untidy.

  • vinark
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2009-06-05
  • Posts: 2,665

Re: Which USB interface?

You are aware the 2 phones can be used simultaneously,but do carry the same sound, it's 1 DAC. And of course another DAC for the analog outs.

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
BFpro fs, 2X HDSP9652 ADI-8AE, 2X HDSP9632
  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

Yea that's fine. I used to record vocalists all the time, and they had their own headphones of course. Not so much now, but on the rare occasion I do, I can just use the other headphone out, or just use line out, as I might just get digital monitors, so line outs will be free, unless I decide I like to process OTB, but I doubt that. I mix all itb. Outboard is not necessary in this day and age. Compact and mobile for me is better.

  • TomVY
  • AD/DA expert
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2023-05-16
  • Posts: 61

Re: Which USB interface?

Does the Digiface USB use Steadyclock or Steadyclock FS?