You are not logged in. Please login or register.
RME User Forum → FireWire & USB series → UFXII 2024 specs???
Hi
I'm using RME audio interfaces since 2007, I have a FF400, a Babyface Pro and today my new UFXII has just arrived!!!
I made the descision to buy one because I read on your site that it has the same specs with the UFXIII, except the MADI and USB3 connections.
But my printed manual, does not confirm that!
Nor does it say that it has Steady clock FS, DC coupled outputs etc.
I bought it new from Thomann.
What specs information is valid, the printed or the online?
Printed manuals are older, online manuals are up-to-date.
The question is whether you have the older UFX II or the updated one.
I would write RME support the serial number and ask.
Thank you.
I just did that.
I send an email with my serial number to the RME Support.
I also asked Thomann when purchasing my device, to check if it is the newer version before they send it to me.
I assume that they did, but nothing can confirm that.
There is no such desription on the package, nor in the manual, that it has all the newer specs.
I have an idea. It might be that you can check this yourself.
If I remember / understood correctly from reading this forum, then the newer units got both, a new analog AND digital board.
Ensure that the latest firmware has been flashed with the latest version of fut tool.
Then check in driver settings, whether both ADAT ports can be set to optical SPDIF.
AFAIK, this is only possible with the new digital board. The older boards (UFX, UFX+, UFX II (old version)) only allowed for the ADAT2 port to be switchable between ADAT and SPDIF protocol. If you can configure SPDIF for ADAT1 and ADAT2 then you should have the latest HW release and the analog board of UFX III with AKM converter.
Thanks Ramses!!!
In the Madiface Driver Settings my Driver version is the 0.9833 and the Hardware Revision is 206.
I did the update as soon as I connected the device to my PC.
I checked the Output options and found that the Optical 1 can be set to either ADAT or SPDIF and the Optical 2 can be set to ADAT, SPDIF, or AES.
So according to what you said, it seems I have the newer version!!!
Another hint you can find in the flash updater specs:
Fireface UFX II, Hw Rev A: USB 26, DSP 24, CC 15*
Fireface UFX II, Hw Rev E: USB 115, DSP 24, CC 112*
Fireface UFX II, Hw Rev 7: USB 206, DSP 24, CC 208*
I think Hw Rev 7 is the newest version.
Thanks!
It seems that I have the newer version.
But there is another thing I noticed with my specific unit :
I does not sit flat on a flat surface, it swings lightly if I press on one corner.
At first I thought that I didn't stick the plastic feet that came in the box correctly.
But then I turned it upside down and noticed the same issue.
Do you think this is a problem, should I return the item and ask for a replacement???
My brand new UCX II (like yours bought from Thomann) also does this. Slightly annoying, but not a real problem, right?
Thanks!
I does not sit flat on a flat surface, it swings lightly if I press on one corner.
At first I thought that I didn't stick the plastic feet that came in the box correctly.
But then I turned it upside down and noticed the same issue.
Do you think this is a problem, should I return the item and ask for a replacement???
This unit is intended to be mounted in a rack.
My old FF400 does not do that, nor my Babyface Pro, nor my Focusrite ISA Two, nor my Behringer Flow 8, nor my SPL Goldmike 9844.
"This unit is intended to be mounted in a rack" is no excuse for a faulty metal construction.
Wether on not it is a real problem, or if it might cause a problem in the future I don't know.
But if it happens to all new units, that is not good for RME as a company.
I am now also wondering if this affects my unit somehow in the long run. A lot of my substantially cheaper equipment sits firlmy on my table. Is this just a cosmetical thing or does it signify some more serious production issues or quality control?
My old FF400 does not do that, nor my Babyface Pro, nor my Focusrite ISA Two, nor my Behringer Flow 8, nor my SPL Goldmike 9844.
"This unit is intended to be mounted in a rack" is no excuse for a faulty metal construction.
Wether on not it is a real problem, or if it might cause a problem in the future I don't know.
But if it happens to all new units, that is not good for RME as a company.
Among other things, you mention devices with a much smaller footprint (9.5" devices) where the probability of something bending is much lower.
I am since very long in this forum and this is the 1st time that I heard about such issues.
These are now a few exceptions and there is no need to generalize it in any way only because of a few cases.
However, it is your right, at least in Germany, to return such a device. If you do not like it, well, please talk to your vendor and ask for a replacement.
Thanks Ramses!
What you said proves that my unit is a faulty one and I should send it back for replacement, because it is an exception.
I'll do that and I'll see if the next one will be OK.
I suggest oknot24 does the same, if his UCXII is still in the 30-day money-back guarantee, or contact Thomann for this.
Yes, I have just recieved my unit two days ago, so I think I'll do the same. Since UCX II is quite smaller and as a result harder to bend I think this is maybe more serious issue than I thought. Any words from official RME staff on this?
For your information I've send my UFXII back and I'm waiting for a replacement.
I hope the second one won't have any issues.
Well, while I'm waiting for my UFXII return to arrive so that they send me a replacement, I was thinking about getting the UFXIII...
I will probably never need MADI, nor will I have another 2.650€ to buy a 12mic(which also works with ADAT by the way, if I decide so in the future), but if there is any other difference I would like to know.
In the RME site they say that the UFXIII is also capable for mastering, while they don't say that for the UFXII.
If they are identical except for the MADI, then I'll stay with my initial choice I guess.
Could you help me with my decision???
I should mention that even the UFXII channel count is way more than I need now and probably more than I'll ever need.
I skipped the UCXII since it is a little limiting and I already have a similar sized FF400, so I know.
Thanks in advance!
Presumably RME has not seen this or has not yet had the time to add it to the product page on their webserver. To be on the safe side, you can send mail to support and link to this thread.
MADI is not only useful for later extensions, it can also be very practical in the following cases:
- if you use TotalMix FX for creating Submixes that you want to record via loopback, in case your other I/O ports are already in use
- if the max cable length of ADAT is not sufficient to reach a preamp in one or two other recording rooms, according to the standards ADAT max cable length is around 10 m, with RME you reach up to 15-15 m. If you chain MADI devices then the multimode fiber cable may be up to 2 km between each of the devices in a chain. OM3/OM4 multimode patch cables are usually available between 0.5–30 or even 50m.
This is now speculation, but due to MADI, higher channel count and USB3 the UFX III might have a larger FPGA which might be beneficial for any potential future feature update that (in a bad case of luck) might only be feasible on the UFX III.
What I think will definitively happen is, that an UFX II gets a feature update but the UFX III not.
802 FS is maybe another device / another story, but there it is already problematic to implement Room EQ and Crossfeed.
The question is, whether this is worth for you spending the money for such things to be on the "safer side".
RME User Forum → FireWire & USB series → UFXII 2024 specs???
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.