You are not logged in. Please login or register.
RME User Forum → FireWire & USB series → UCX II Hardware Revision 6 vs 7 differences?
Hi, skimming through the firmware update tool readme.txt I see there is a Rev 6 and a Rev 7 of the UCX II, what are the differences? And how can I know which one I have? Thanks
The Rev 6 uses the Spartan 6 FPGA, which is discontinued, and Rev 7 uses the new Spartan 7. The Firmware updater does recognize that and sees which firmware version is valid. There is no functional difference.
The Rev 6 uses the Spartan 6 FPGA, which is discontinued, and Rev 7 uses Spartan 7. The Firmware updater does recognize that and see which firmware version will be valid.
Thanks for the clarification. I assume I have Rev 6 because I got mine last year and the readme.txt didn't mention a Rev 7 yet. Does this make any difference from a user's perspective? For example, in terms of heat generation, DSP resources, etc.
Quote: There is no functional difference.
Quote: There is no functional difference.
Thanks MC
Quote: There is no functional difference.
What is power consumption and thermal dfference ?
MC wrote:Quote: There is no functional difference.
What is power consumption and thermal dfference ?
I'll chime in here because I tend to prefer devices that run cool over devices that run hot. Most of the heat the UCX II generates comes form the amplifier chips which are always "online" and therefore sucking power (source: I took mine apart to check where the heat was coming from). As beautiful as this device is, the fact that the amps can't be switched off for unused outputs is unfortunate because unused outputs take juice and generate heat. I know MC has said many times it's all within specs so I don't worry about it but it's disappointing knowing that it could have been designed to be more efficient and run cooler. As I said before, including this functionality in future products be an attractive feature.
Anyway, since the amp chips are probably the same, any difference in heat and power consumption going form revision 6 to 7 will be down to the new FPGA chip and that won't be a big difference.
What you draw up here is unrealistic and therefore does not exist anywhere. First issue: how to define a channel that is not active? Second issue: turning off the OPAMP power will cause immense pop/click noise that might require relais for every single output (no space, too high costs). Finally - what about the input channels? Pop/click here might be controllable, but still how to define an active channel?
Plus this all feels like over the top, cumbersome and useless when at the same time much higher amounts of power are used elsewhere (computer, monitor, amp...).
One could configure it in the driver, or even better in TotalMix so that it could be saved even for standalone operation....
But the main question, beside aditional costs, more elements to break/fail and so on. Whether is it worth it. Maybe for standalone work when running from batteries.... But I doubt it would be worth all the troubles and costs.
First issue: how to define a channel that is not active?
Finally - what about the input channels? Pop/click here might be controllable, but still how to define an active channel?
Sure, I meant a manual switch, the same way channels can be shown/hidden. When an output or input has no cables physically connected to it and I know I won't be using it for sure I would manually turn it off in TMFX. I think this approach is more than acceptable, it doesn't have to be smart in any way. Below I include a mock-up with the "Power" column (btw what does the "In use" column mean? I couldn't find a description in the user manual):
Note: A disabled input or output channel still allows loopback to function, only the amp is turned off to save power and reduce heat.
Second issue: turning off the OPAMP power will cause immense pop/click noise that might require relays for every single output (no space, too high costs).
That's the nature of the beast. Just show a warning message with [OK] and [Cancel] buttons just before the on/off state of an amp is about to change (for example, when the user manually turns it from on to off, or when the user switches workspaces that switch at least one op-amp). Once the user has been warned, it's up to the user to ensure the monitors are turned off, etc. We are responsible adults, it's fine.
Plus this all feels like over the top, cumbersome and useless when at the same time much higher amounts of power are used elsewhere (computer, monitor, amp...).
People love RGB lights, is it necessary? Probably not. Do people like cool-running gear? F*ck yeah! If at any point RME needs to give customers a reason to upgrade, reduced heat is always an attractive feature.
But it applies to what is seen in TM, not what is used and not what is seen and usable in DAW.
And, what would happen if one switches snapshot/preset in standalone operation? There is no message to popup on many devices. And even if device has screen would one see/notice the note? And so on...
But it applies to what is seen in TM, not what is used and not what is seen and usable in DAW.
And, what would happen if one switches snapshot/preset in standalone operation? There is no window to popup on many devices. And even if device has screen would one see the note? And so on...
If you use standalone mode and want to avoid pops 100% then don't use this I guess. That said though, the hardware could easily warn and require ok/cancel confirmation on the LCD. I mean, where there's a will there's a way, but it's a lot easier to come up with reasons why something is not possible.
The question is, whether all this is worth all those possible troubles for most of users.
I understand it is worth for you even with all the limitations. But others may have other needs... For example I would not be happy if I would have to switch off the gear if I change the number of visible outputs.
For sure, there are ways to acomplish what you suggest, but it would cost as MC explained, if it should be user friendly...
reduced heat is always an attractive feature.
No it's not. It's a personal preference.
Electronics can handle heat/warmth. You can run a Fireface 24/7 and it will be fine. Cooling something is always more expensive in the end.
RME User Forum → FireWire & USB series → UCX II Hardware Revision 6 vs 7 differences?
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.