FIXXXER wrote:So the UFXIII has the same converter as the ADI-2 PRO FS R
Same as ADI-2 Pro FS (AK4490), not ADI-2 Pro FS R BE (AK4493) which differs a little in technical specs.
Not only for UFX III, same for later models of UFX II, which got now the same analog and digital section as the UFX III.
The only difference is now MADI/USB3 (due to high number of channels).
FIXXXER wrote:does that mean also that the audio quality is the same or can the audio quality vary due to some other factors?
Same chip, maybe little differences in the analog section, but both of high quality, see technical specs. Other differences: device-specific features of the reference converters like auto ref level and 4 (ADI-2/4 Pro SE even 5 and support for turntable and RIAA support).
Regarding D/A filter. With the ADI-2 DAC/Pro you can change A/D and D/A filter, with UFX II/III not. The reason is, that recording interfaces get the AD/DA filter which gives the best linearity, especially @single speed, to prevent that something is missing in the higher frequencies (see treble roll-off at single speed for e.g., slow filter).
FIXXXER wrote:I must admit that i am not a fan of TotalMix [...]
I am also playing guitar. For me, it is the opposite.
I have absolutely no issues with TM FX and couldn't live with it anymore.
The concept of having individual Submixes per HW output is completely fine and covers all needs.
To click to an HW output and to move the fader of Inputs and Audio coming from PC I regard as easy and straightforward for changing a submix. Once it is set, you can store it. That's it.
With one mouse click, you can even provide the same settings as "DAW mode" and route everything in the DAW.
Same as you would get in DAW mode.
The advantage, you have still the option to route the vocals of a vocalist on the "shorter way" directly from the input to the output without having RTL over DAW.
What I did after a couple of years. Removed all routings and deployed only the necessary ones.
Additionally, I marked every channel as hidden that I do not require.
Result: even more overview, especially in matrix mode, which is perfect for reviewing the routings.
As a guitarist, I have additional comfort with TM FX: the integration and optimum utilization of two external FX, Lexicon PCM 81 and 91. With a few TM FX routings / Snapshots, I can use them either for guitar, DAW or both (81 with modulation effects for guitar and 91 as external FX in Cubase).
Also, a big win, the quality of the instrument input of the UFX III. I plug my guitar into the UFX III and can route the guitar signal to everywhere where I want and even make a backup recording using DURec.
My use cases for UFX III:
- send the signal to my booster/amp if I want to record the two combos (stereo setup).
- use the UFX III as a parallel effect loop for the amps.
- play guitar through VSTi up to an ASIO buffer size of 128 samples at single speed with a RTL of 7.3 ms (lowest RTL with 32 samples is 2,99 ms)
- reamping with the recorded dry guitar signal from instrument input
My use cases for ADI-2 Pro FS R BE
- for monitoring with closed planar headphones DCA Aeon 2 CB / active monitors
- for listening music with active Monitors / HiFi
- using dynamic loudness a lot when listening to music during work at very low levels so that it is not disturbing
- excellent sound for any content (YouTube, Games, ...)
- protection of ear and equipment, solves any level mismatches, 0dB in TM FX do not lead to excessive volume
- slow ramp-up of volume when inserting phones or switching between active monitors and phones
It helps to understand the typical flows in such a digital setup.
TM FX submix supports this ideally:
- any input signals are (with default settings) recorded 1:1, about those you do not need to care
- routing has to deal with HW outputs, you decide on a per HW output basis, what needs to be routed to there,
either for monitoring purposes or if you want to make use of 3rd party FX
- click to a loopback button of any HW output and you can record this output/submix on the corresponding input.
FIXXXER wrote:So all in all, the ADI-2 PRO FS R seems like the better choice, right?
Whatever you prefer, it depends on your demands and personal preferences.
My preference will always be a combination of RME recording interface and reference converter.
Therefore, I summarized my use cases above, which should demonstrate to you that a combination of recording interface and reference converter makes sense, also for a guitarist. Both in combination results in an optimum setup with the needed flexibility of TM FX and the unique features of the reference converters for monitoring.
If UFX III and reference converter are too expensive in combination, then I would think about a combination of UFX II or UCX II and ADI-2 Pro FS R BE. If only one device is desired for use in the home recording studio, then my choice would clearly be a recording interface with TM FX.
An ADI-2 Pro FS R BE or ADI-2/4 Pro SE can also be integrated into the setup at a later date.
However, if you're struggling with TM FX, it could also make sense to buy everything completely so that you only have to deal with the routing one time.
BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13