Fireface UFX Black lion premium mod

[robertshaw]

Originally Posted by DR Music

I work with it and glad I made a GREAT decision. I have converters (2-Profire2626, 96i/o) that I know are equal to better then most higher end converters. But as soon as I say that, the people who own those not all heavy priced converters, dog on the mods. I can afford converters over 3k, but I choose to spend it on pre's, mics, comps, eq's, and building my ControlRoom correctly.

this makes no sense

[DR Music]

Originally Posted by robertshaw

this makes no sense

Apologizes Mr Shaw.
Didn't notice the errors, til you mentioned it.
:(

[claend]

[QUOTE=Macsearcher;7516238]
This session sounded huge, faders up.
[QUOTE]

I tend to restect BLA but these kind of statements really put me off.

[neirbod]

Originally Posted by MichaelPatrick

I've got comparison captures and will start to sort them out later today. I'll post them this weekend, or before if time allows.

[Macsearcher]

[QUOTE=claend;7521542][QUOTE=Macsearcher;7516238]
This session sounded huge, faders up.

I tend to restect BLA but these kind of statements really put me off.

Ok. Let me be more specific.
If a song is arranged and recorded well, it tends to almost mix itself. Record it, pull up the faders and you should be able to get a pretty good impression of where it is going.
I have found that when I used to record to tape, I experienced this fairly consistently. I struggle a bit more in the digital world. I am generally able to get there but I am tempted to lean on enhancements to get things to gel and to feel big and open.
When tracking with the modded UFX, I did not feel as much need to go to reverbs and EQ. The overall image felt spacious and natural to me. The bottom end felt clean and deep. The highs didn't feel suffocated. Things seemed to fall into place easily. There was a pleasing sense of the natural space that I recorded in.
My overall feeling was that it made my job as producer/mixer a lot easier.
I did not do any a/b testing. This was not a case of me specifically looking to test gear. I have used the non-modded ufx on many sessions in the same studio with the same engineer and some of the same players. I was quite inspired by the new unit. I am simply sharing my impressions.

[DR Music]

[QUOTE=Macsearcher;7524297][QUOTE=claend;7521542]

Originally Posted by Macsearcher

This session sounded huge, faders up.


Ok. Let me be more specific.
If a song is arranged and recorded well, it tends to almost mix itself. Record it, pull up the faders and you should be able to get a pretty good impression of where it is going.
I have found that when I used to record to tape, I experienced this fairly consistently. I struggle a bit more in the digital world. I am generally able to get there but I am tempted to lean on enhancements to get things to gel and to feel big and open.
When tracking with the modded UFX, I did not feel as much need to go to reverbs and EQ. The overall image felt spacious and natural to me. The bottom end felt clean and deep. The highs didn't feel suffocated. Things seemed to fall into place easily. There was a pleasing sense of the natural space that I recorded in.
My overall feeling was that it made my job as producer/mixer a lot easier.
I did not do any a/b testing. This was not a case of me specifically looking to test gear. I have used the non-modded ufx on many sessions in the same studio with the same engineer and some of the same players. I was quite inspired by the new unit. I am simply sharing my impressions.

+100
thanks for sharing.. I might jump on the BLA UFX!!

[ABBA]

On the Gear shootouts/Audio tests there seems to be no difference att all
before and after the Black Lion mod on MOTU 828 mkII A/D/A.

******//www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-...ut-thread.html

Can anyone show the big difference and include some audiofiles
instead of the usual gearslut method (= lots of talk but no substantial evidence)

Thank you

[DR Music]

Originally Posted by ABBA

On the Gear shootouts/Audio tests there seems to be no difference att all
before and after the Black Lion mod on MOTU 828 mkII A/D/A.

******//www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-...ut-thread.html

Can anyone show the big difference and include some audiofiles
instead of the usual gearslut method (= lots of talk but no substantial evidence)

Thank you

I THINK It's a must to here it in person...!! I hated BLA til I heard a 003 Sig Mod compared to my 003 at that time.... In person, on your monitors!! Day and night..

[miscend]

Originally Posted by DR Music

I THINK It's a must to here it in person...!! I hated BLA til I heard a 003 Sig Mod compared to my 003 at that time.... In person, on your monitors!! Day and night..

What matters should be what it sounds like on record.

[DR Music]

Originally Posted by miscend

What matters should be what it sounds like on record.

Exactly.....

[king2070lplaya]

Jesus folks....

If you don't "like" BLA, good for you. Youve said your piece, whether warranted or not, move on.

Why continually dog a company whose product you have never owned or had any intention of owning? Do you feel compelled to denegrate their reputation out of some sense of social justice? Are you doing future would-be consumers a service by talking out your patootie?

Honestly, how can you say you "hate" a company without ever using their actual product?

[nms]

Originally Posted by king2070lplaya

Why continually dog a company whose product you have never owned or had any intention of owning? Do you feel compelled to denegrate their reputation out of some sense of social justice? Are you doing future would-be consumers a service by talking out your patootie?

Who's talking out their back end though really? Why is it that there's always been a lack of evidence proving the claimed differences in the BLA mods? They exist in person but can't be measured with software? There is no good explanation as to the lack of evidence. If there were proven and significant results that would certainly be a selling feature for BLA and be something they'd be eager to share don't you think? I have a problem with any company who charges those kind of prices, makes those kind of claims, but provides no hard evidence and eludes user tested evidence as well.

Let's get a few things clear here. No RME product (with or without mods) has ever been in the league of conversion as a Mytek 8x192 or Metric Halo ULN8/LIO8 for instance. Where transparency of line level conversion is concerned (the preamps might be better but I never care about onboard pres), UFX actually lags in the pack behind the FF400/800/Multiface. In testing we're talking second to last place among 28 different units tested. I spotted phase issues in the low end on a 60hz sine that I didn't even need a phase scope or listening to notice but confirmed with the phase scope in Sonalksis stereo tools. The low end response was the second sloppiest of the 28 units.

******//www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-...ut-thread.html


I've attached below a proper (gain & subsample aligned, the only truly accurate way) null test of the piano tracks from Michael's ******//www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-...ification.html thread nulled against each other. You can hear yourself what was left behind and decide if you find it significant. I left the first couple seconds untouched so you have a context of the level differences. If the takes were clocked by the same clock they would have nulled even deeper, as clock drift does cause nulls to fade in and out of volume due to time alignment.

You guys can do what you wish with these results, but don't ever forget how easy it is for people to be fooled when brand expectation/ new product hype/ marketing/ hearsay/ poor test conditions/ subtle level differences all can steer you off course and trigger a snowball effect of misinformation to be passed on. While many would mistakenly think it an absurd notion, I have a Motu 828mk2 in front of me that slays every RME in conversion transparency and you'll find a lot of hard evidence of that in the link above. I picked it up in december after going over the results taken from a few other users' units and have confirmed it first hand in every test I've thrown at it.

The UFX is brilliant where drivers and connectivity are concerned. I would gladly use one in my studio. I just wouldn't use its converters

That said, if you're happy with it don't let anyone tell you you shouldn't be happy. It's not a hallmark in conversion quality, but you can't expect everything for that price.

[DR Music]

While many would mistakenly think it an absurd notion, I have a Motu 828mk2 in front of me that slays every RME in conversion transparency and you'll find a lot of hard evidence of that in the link above.

828mk2!!!
Wow...
I've heard it all!!
Please send that unit to BLA. Do yourself a huge favor.
How about if I pay half? That way when you hear the difference and you can thank me everytime you switch that bad boy on.

[nms]

lol.. I hope you're joking. Check that thread and you can find verified results and audio files of stock vs BLA. Or don't, ignore the facts, and just go on assuming and talking.

Personally, I believe in differences that can be measured, captured in a recording, and show up on a waveform.

[DR Music]

Originally Posted by nms

lol.. I hope you're joking. Check that thread and you can find verified results and audio files of stock vs BLA. Or don't, ignore the facts, and just go on assuming and talking.

Personally, I believe in differences that can be measured, captured in a recording, and show up on a waveform.

I've heard the 828mkll and the 828 with the mod in a basement studio.. Because I recommended the guy too. This is nuts, it was so clear and obvious the mod did a fantastic job. The guy was so excited. Just on playback their was a difference.
I'm 100% sure if you go with a mod, you will love it. 200%!!!
But, ok.... I'm done talking about BLA.
Go ahead and think the 828mkll is great. Its not.
Waveform.....ok.. Trust your ear!! that's our most valuable asset.

[6strings]

Originally Posted by DR Music

Trust your ear!! that's our most valuable asset.

The point you don't get is... when it comes to judging pure transparency, you CAN'T trust your own ears. Kind of like how photo editors use calibration equipment to set the color levels on their monitors rather than by using their eyes alone.

[DR Music]

Originally Posted by 6strings

The point you don't get is... when it comes to judging pure transparency, you CAN'T trust your own ears. Kind of like how photo editors use calibration equipment to set the color levels on their monitors rather than by using their eyes alone.

We are talking AUDIO....
That's Enhancing and Visual...
People h"ear" music...

[Prick Up UR Ears]

Originally Posted by 6strings

The point you don't get is... when it comes to judging pure transparency, you CAN'T trust your own ears. Kind of like how photo editors use calibration equipment to set the color levels on their monitors rather than by using their eyes alone.

+10 !

well, right, he doesn't get that there are optical as well as acoustic illusions and you can trick out the ears as you can the eyes.

Listening to those existing, but really subtle differences, I'd say its not worth a 700$, at least not for me; moving a mic a few inches causes a much bigger difference.



Nevertheless, thanks Michael for your effort, it was an interesting revelation (at least to some of us)

[nms]

Originally Posted by DR Music

I've heard the 828mkll and the 828 with the mod in a basement studio.. Because I recommended the guy too.

Alright you clearly don't have interest in acknowledging factual evidence that is clear as day in that other thread and corroborated by the most basic audio science (null test only cancels out if waveforms are same) as well as identified visually on side by side inspection of the identical waveforms and plenty of (level matched to 0.005db) audio to listen to. It sounds like you did a bang up job of testing it in your friend's basement that time, so I won't discuss it further.

[DR Music]

Originally Posted by nms

Alright you clearly don't have interest in acknowledging factual evidence that is clear as day in that other thread and corroborated by the most basic audio science (null test only cancels out if waveforms are same) as well as identified visually on side by side inspection of the identical waveforms and plenty of (level matched to 0.005db) audio to listen to. It sounds like you did a bang up job of testing it in your friend's basement that time, so I won't discuss it further.

Night and Day slut!
But ok you WIN!

[nms]

I suppose it's possible your friend had a faulty unit.

Funny, I just received this in a message from someone who's been following the big test thread.. He and his friend with the orpheus just picked up two 828mk2's and can't believe the results:

"The unit smokes! We have a Pro Tools HD2 system with 192's. The Motu's sounds equally good or slightly better, it sounds better than my friends Prism Orphues."

I bought one in december and have tested it extensively. But anyways this is supposed to be a thread about UFX and BLA so we'll cut the 828 chat.

[king2070lplaya]

NMS, I wish you could come hear my modded Digi 002r. The sounds that come out of it are stunning. It would make you a believer that there is value to what this company is doing. It bums me out that these dudes are getting ragged on so much, they are truly genuine And cool people. Maybe the UFX mod isn't worth the bones, I don't know that piece or the mod, but the company and the people are legit as hell.

[miscend]

Originally Posted by DR Music

We are talking AUDIO....
That's Enhancing and Visual...
People h"ear" music...

Your mind can play tricks on you. That why there's a placebo effect.

[miscend]

Originally Posted by nms

Who's talking out their back end though really? Why is it that there's always been a lack of evidence proving the claimed differences in the BLA mods? They exist in person but can't be measured with software? There is no good explanation as to the lack of evidence. If there were proven and significant results that would certainly be a selling feature for BLA and be something they'd be eager to share don't you think? I have a problem with any company who charges those kind of prices, makes those kind of claims, but provides no hard evidence and eludes user tested evidence as well.

Let's get a few things clear here. No RME product (with or without mods) has ever been in the league of conversion as a Mytek 8x192 or Metric Halo ULN8/LIO8 for instance. Where transparency of line level conversion is concerned (the preamps might be better but I never care about onboard pres), UFX actually lags in the pack behind the FF400/800/Multiface. In testing we're talking second to last place among 28 different units tested. I spotted phase issues in the low end on a 60hz sine that I didn't even need a phase scope or listening to notice but confirmed with the phase scope in Sonalksis stereo tools. The low end response was the second sloppiest of the 28 units.

******//www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-...ut-thread.html


I've attached below a proper (gain & subsample aligned, the only truly accurate way) null test of the piano tracks from Michael's ******//www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-...ification.html thread nulled against each other. You can hear yourself what was left behind and decide if you find it significant. I left the first couple seconds untouched so you have a context of the level differences. If the takes were clocked by the same clock they would have nulled even deeper, as clock drift does cause nulls to fade in and out of volume due to time alignment.

You guys can do what you wish with these results, but don't ever forget how easy it is for people to be fooled when brand expectation/ new product hype/ marketing/ hearsay/ poor test conditions/ subtle level differences all can steer you off course and trigger a snowball effect of misinformation to be passed on. While many would mistakenly think it an absurd notion, I have a Motu 828mk2 in front of me that slays every RME in conversion transparency and you'll find a lot of hard evidence of that in the link above. I picked it up in december after going over the results taken from a few other users' units and have confirmed it first hand in every test I've thrown at it.

The UFX is brilliant where drivers and connectivity are concerned. I would gladly use one in my studio. I just wouldn't use its converters

That said, if you're happy with it don't let anyone tell you you shouldn't be happy. It's not a hallmark in conversion quality, but you can't expect everything for that price.

I disagree with you in regards to the RME. I think the testing methodology was unfavourable.

[nms]

Originally Posted by miscend

I disagree with you in regards to the RME. I think the testing methodology was unfavourable.

I sure hear that. It's not easy finding a test that favors RME sound among the cleaner sounding units out there. I've certainly tried.

[Category 5]

Originally Posted by nms

I sure hear that. It's not easy finding a test that favors RME sound among the cleaner sounding units out there. I've certainly tried.

Your test have a lot of merit because they do demonstrate how distorted a wavefile can get through multiple passes through these devices. It's just that musically, in use, your findings are not really congruent with what most ears in the professional community are hearing.

The fact that the Orpheus and UFX are so low down on your list sort of illustrates that. I know the MH ranks at the top as well it should, but in actual use in music production some of the devices down on your list are preferred in real world use. I certainly know that a 828mk2 doesn't sound better than the Prism box by any stretch of the imagination. If your tests really show how transparent a unit is then I guess transparency isn't as closely related to musicality or usability as we might have thought.

I do like tests like yours because they give us a look into a piece of hardware we might not otherwise guess, it's just that too often the results don't depict meaningful information where real world usage is concerned.

[nms]

Well it depends what you consider to be worth more.. the opinion of 100 amateurs who don't know how to properly do an in depth analysis on a piece of gear or 10 pro mastering engineers or experienced gear testers employing phase, distortion, and other such tests with proper tools. Anyone who knows converters well will tell you the UFX isn't in the same league as any high end converters like Mytek, Metric Halo, Lavry etc. Not even close. You won't find any acclaimed mastering engineers using a UFX.. or an Orpheus for that matter! When a unit like the UFX tests that low on my null test it corroborates in multiple other ways. It doesn't matter if I test 1 pass through the converters or 10 and that's a fact. All it does is scale the results.

After seeing the null result I looked further to find the UFX has more low end phasing in 1 pass than the 828mk2 does in 10 passes. I have been talking daily with a user who owns both UFX and FF800 and has no gear bias. He's contributed plenty of UFX tests for me and without a doubt he feels his FF800 has a tighter punchier sound than the UFX. This is perfectly in line with what my test results show as differences between those two. Another user just messaged me saying he and a colleague grabbed 828mk2's.. One of them owns an Orpheus and had this to say: "The unit smokes! We have a Pro Tools HD2 system with 192's. The Motu's sounds equally good or slightly better, it sounds better than my friend's Prism Orpheus."

A lot of people would rather defend their expensive purchases and are uninterested in believing their flaws. Many of those people scoff at the idea of say an 828mk2 disrupting their preconceived hierarchy or tests that show results clear as day. The results are there though and they corroborate. I condone proper testing because of the cold hard fact that your ears are fooled far more often than the tests. One of the most basic factors has a notorious record for fooling the human ear and that's a mere level mismatch. Next is precognitive bias where people expect to hear improvement based on assumptions about more expensive gear.

There's a reason scientific equipment is used for important testing in many fields rather than relying only on perception. Think about it.

In the meantime, I invite any of you to send me a piece of audio at any sample rate to run through the 828mk2's converters 10 or 15 times to compare to the original for your own ears.

[lobsterinn]

What was this thread about?

[nms]

How to spend the most money to get the least results?
How to ignore test results that point heavily in one direction and sweep it under the rug when revealed if it defies conventional thought? The power of precognitive bias? All of those things I'd say. Despite Michael & I having some conflicting views I still appreciate him taking the time to set up his test thread with modded vs stock UFX so people can make more informed decisions if considering this route.

It's not cheap being in this industry and trying to achieve a high level of sonic excellence. People will make out a lot better if they utilize technology to assist them in proper gear assessments. If you only use your ears you face a lot of disadvantages. We're not talking about auditioning monitors here.. The differences are much smaller and harder to measure without recording an entire mix with identical levels and takes.

[Stepwise Sound]

In the meantime, I invite any of you to send me a piece of audio at any sample rate to run through the 828mk2's converters 10 or 15 times to compare to the original for your own ears.

A producer I know, Chuck Zwicky, did just that.

Zmix Converter Tests

"I decided to run a "worst case scenario" test for myself.

I have Benchmark DAC-1s and several MOTU HD192s but my lowliest converter is my MOTU 1296 .....

Each pass I bounced the file through the converters , imported that file, and -normalized it- (Like I said "worst case")

and repeated this process ten times to get 60 generations deep."

You can hear the results for yourself and make up your own mind.