Topic: Babyface or Fireface UC: which is more suitable?

Hi,

I've heard a lot of good things about RME and atm I've narrowed down my search to replace my Delta 1010LT with either a Babyface or a UC.

Obviously low noisefloor/high sound quality is extremely important but I am told that both the UC and Baby are pretty much identical in this regard?

I use Cubase and I'll mainly be using the interface to record guitars and vocals, I've no need to record drums for the forseeable future (I have a Roland TD-8 kit for triggering which is decent enough)

I would ideally like to record 3 tracks simultaneously (which would allow me to double mic my J-200 and record its pickup or record an acoustic, singer and electric guitar, for example), I take it that this is a given for the UC but not the Babyface? I would happily make do with 2, and use the surplus funds towards getting a better mic than I otherwise would, if the Babyface allowed me this capability in the future. Is that possible? or would I forever be stuck with only being able to record 2 tracks at a time?

I'm also open to mic suggestions. If I was to get a babyface I could spend about £450 on a mic. If I got a UC I'd be able to spend around £200


Thanks

Re: Babyface or Fireface UC: which is more suitable?

The BF will also record more than two channels with an additional external AD converter (with or without preamp), connected via SPDIF optical or ADAT (up to 8 channels).

Regards
Daniel Fuchs
RME

Regards
Daniel Fuchs
RME