Steinberg Mr816 vs Saffire Pro 40 vs RME ADI 2

[smoovemode]

Which one of these units has the best converter?

[adrianww]

If I had to hazard a guess, I'd probably lean towards the RME. If the AD-DA shootout testing over in the audio tests forum is at all accurate, neither the MR nor the Saffire come out well. (Although the Saffire tested was a Liquid Saffire 56, not a Pro 40.)

[Beyersound]

Originally Posted by adrianww

If the AD-DA shootout testing over in the audio tests forum is at all accurate, neither the MR nor the Saffire come out well. (Although the Saffire tested was a Liquid Saffire 56, not a Pro 40.)

I would venture a guess that they are using a malfunctioning MR816 or are performing inaccurate tests. Those converters are excellent, and are at least in a markedly higher league than the original PTHD 192 converters are.

[adrianww]

Nope, I think that the tests have been repeated by different people using different units, cables, etc. And, although the detailed numbers (noise floor, RMS correlation between what goes in and what goes out) might change slightly, the approximate ranking of the interfaces stays about the same. Compared to lots of other things, the MR's are not transparent at all. Neither is the Focusrite LS56 (it's even worse).

This doesn't mean to say they sound bad or are unusable. The test is comparing an original file to the recorded copy that results after it has been looped back through the interface 10 times, so it's pushing the converters (and any analogue circuits around them) pretty hard. The guys there seem to be trying pretty hard to gather as much data as possible and make the test as solid as they can. Various folks have taken a tilt at the test method and the thinking behind it (the thread is miles long now), but so far I haven't found any of the tilting convincing. Or, at least, not so convincing as to just discount the results of the entire testing process.

It also doesn't necessarily say that you're going to notice the difference much (unless you've got an excellent monitoring chain, room and good ears). But, however you slice it, it's looking like the MR and the Saffires don't do well at all in terms of transparent conversion. Whether you notice it and whether you can live with it if you do notice it are where it just comes down to personal preference or mindset I suppose.

[smoovemode]

I appreciate the input on this thread. The rme adi-2 seems to be the only sub 1000.00 converter out there. Do any of you guys know any hidden gems? I'm trying to connect a UA 7-410 to the unit, preferably by adat.

[adrianww]

If you don't mind going down the PCIe route, the RME HDSPe AIO is a very nice piece of kit. Two analog inputs plus ADAT, SPDIF and AES too I think. Also an option to extend with additional RME analog I/O boards in the computer (if you have the space). It was the other interface I considered buying myself last year, but I went with a Focusrite LS56 instead (which I'm loving regardless of any transparency issues).

Of course, if you're planning on connecting an external pre via ADAT, the AD converters in the interface are pretty much irrelevant, since the AD conversion is happening in the external pre's digital output stage anyway.

[smoovemode]

Originally Posted by adrianww

If you don't mind going down the PCIe route, the RME HDSPe AIO is a very nice piece of kit. Two analog inputs plus ADAT, SPDIF and AES too I think. Also an option to extend with additional RME analog I/O boards in the computer (if you have the space). It was the other interface I considered buying myself last year, but I went with a Focusrite LS56 instead (which I'm loving regardless of any transparency issues).

Of course, if you're planning on connecting an external pre via ADAT, the AD converters in the interface are pretty much irrelevant, since the AD conversion is happening in the external pre's digital output stage anyway.

Thanks for that information, Adrian. Just to confirm. If I'm using the adat or AES connection out of the UA 4-710, the converter/interface would simply pass through the converter/interface to the computer DAW?

I did consider the RME and the Lynx cards (800-1100.00). The only issue I had was unless they were using the converter chips from their high end units, they seemed a little bit pricey(new) for something that was not in a box and had the option to go mobile.

For Example The LynxTwo is about 1000.00 (4 in 4 out). The lynx Aurora is 2000.00 for 8 x 8 and is a little better. price is different, but input per input they are the same price.

[adrianww]

Yes, if you want to be mobile, the PCI/PCIe route doesn't really work out! In that case, FireWire or USB2 will be the way to go - at least until someone starts building USB3 and/or Thunderbolt (Lightpeak) audio interfaces. Although you'd need to be wanting to run a fairly hellacious number of simultaneous tracks to need that kind of bandwidth...

Anyway, to return to the other part of your question, if you're planning on running an external pre that has it's own digital output stage (i.e. you have ADAT, SPDIF or AES output from the pre itself) then the AD conversion has already been done. The signal into your interface shouldn't be passing through the interface's own AD converters at all - it's already digital and should (for all practical purposes) be getting handed off straight onto the PCI/FireWire/USB bus and sent into your DAW. Of course, your interface's software driver is still involved in handling all the traffic back and forth, but your interface's AD converters will basically be sitting there twiddling their thumbs watching the 1's and 0's go streaming past.

The interface's DA converters will still be involved though, 'cos you've got to have some way to get the sound back out again and listen to all the cool stuff you've been doing. Although you could even bypass those if your interface has a digital output (say SPDIF) and you have monitors that can handle a digital input (in which case the DA stage will actually be in the monitors themselves).

[ Edit: I've just thought of one scenario where a digital signal might still pass through the AD converters in an interface - if some kind of sample rate conversion was needed and the interface was designed to support that kind of thing. However, I don't know if there are any interfaces that support it and, even if there are, I'd guess you'd still be able to set things up so that an incoming digital source signal passes straight through. In general, I suspect that all digital inputs into almost all audio interfaces bypass the interface's own AD stage. And someone will probably now come along with an example to prove me wrong...! ]

[smoovemode]

Originally Posted by adrianww

Yes, if you want to be mobile, the PCI/PCIe route doesn't really work out! In that case, FireWire or USB2 will be the way to go - at least until someone starts building USB3 and/or Thunderbolt (Lightpeak) audio interfaces. Although you'd need to be wanting to run a fairly hellacious number of simultaneous tracks to need that kind of bandwidth...

Anyway, to return to the other part of your question, if you're planning on running an external pre that has it's own digital output stage (i.e. you have ADAT, SPDIF or AES output from the pre itself) then the AD conversion has already been done. The signal into your interface shouldn't be passing through the interface's own AD converters at all - it's already digital and should (for all practical purposes) be getting handed off straight onto the PCI/FireWire/USB bus and sent into your DAW. Of course, your interface's software driver is still involved in handling all the traffic back and forth, but your interface's AD converters will basically be sitting there twiddling their thumbs watching the 1's and 0's go streaming past.

The interface's DA converters will still be involved though, 'cos you've got to have some way to get the sound back out again and listen to all the cool stuff you've been doing. Although you could even bypass those if your interface has a digital output (say SPDIF) and you have monitors that can handle a digital input (in which case the DA stage will actually be in the monitors themselves).

[ Edit: I've just thought of one scenario where a digital signal might still pass through the AD converters in an interface - if some kind of sample rate conversion was needed and the interface was designed to support that kind of thing. However, I don't know if there are any interfaces that support it and, even if there are, I'd guess you'd still be able to set things up so that an incoming digital source signal passes straight through. In general, I suspect that all digital inputs into almost all audio interfaces bypass the interface's own AD stage. And someone will probably now come along with an example to prove me wrong...! ]

Adrian,

OMG, if this is the case, I can save a lot of money not buying an expensive converter! All I need to do is be concerned about DA. I could get a saffire pro 40, but still getting UA quality sound.

Here's another question that popped into my head. I have noticed that most dedicated converters do not have headphone amps built in. Let's say I get the ADI 2 and connect my 4-710 to it. I assume the 2 outputs from the ADI 2 go to my monitors. But, What does one do about monitoring headphones?

[beingmf]

Yeah, the funny detail about the MR816 "colouration" is the fact that only the AD is indeed coloured – in a way I personally like very much. Its DA is almost perfectly clean (I prefer it over RME as well...).

[janjaal]

ok, i didn't read all the comments accurately so i might be repeating some statements again..
first of all, the AD of 4-710 is an 8 channel adat. the rme adi-2 takes either 2 channel spdif optical, or coaxial. so i don't think u'll be able to use the AD of the 4-710 with the rme adi-2... unless u use it's analog out into analog in of adi-2, but that's a total waste, u could sell the 4-710 (if u already have bought it) and get a single 710+something else etc...

no i wanna talk about the converters... the AD of the 710 is really crap, like it reminds me of my friend's fasttrack pro, it has a huge blur on it. while the preamps are amazing.. i really prefer the sound of the 710 to the 610...

conversion of mr816 and adi-2 (which i use at home) are pretty close, the AD of adi2 has a bit more solid lowend, but the DA of mr816 has a bit more solid lowend,

i use my mr816 DA's to feed my DBOX, and the mix comes back into mr816's 2 inserts (since u cannot bypass the preamps) << (some people say if you bring down the gain, u'll be ok, but i hear some color when i do this which i don't like)

i use my adi-2 connected to my mr816, to process some stuff from my daw into my outboards, and i use it for tracking vocals as well...

[janjaal]

and my adi-2 not only has 2 analog out, but has a single headphone out as well...

[smoovemode]

Oh man! The 710 ad card is weak? Ohh noooo! I was really counting on this. UPDATE: I just read this article in Mix and the guy loved the converter. But, It would be cool to hear some more input on this. Just found out the Emu card won't work for Macs. Dang...that would have been a good deal. Now I have to find the best value to get my AD into my Mac from the UA 4-710

[smoovemode]

Originally Posted by janjaal

and my adi-2 not only has 2 analog out, but has a single headphone out as well...

Kewl!

[smoovemode]

Originally Posted by beingmf

Yeah, the funny detail about the MR816 "colouration" is the fact that only the AD is indeed coloured – in a way I personally like very much. Its DA is almost perfectly clean (I prefer it over RME as well...).

I heard the ensemble has it's "own sound" too! As long as it's good color, then it's cool. I heard Metric Halo has it's own sound too!

[janjaal]

Originally Posted by smoovemode

Oh man! The 710 ad card is weak? Ohh noooo! I was really counting on this. UPDATE: I just read this article in Mix and the guy loved the converter. But, It would be cool to hear some more input on this. If the converters are cool, I'll probably buy an EMU 1212 (has adat) to hold me over until I can figure out what to do. The 1212 will give me the output, headphone output and hopefully low latency setup for cheap. If later I find out something bad, I would not have lost any significant cash.

so as mr816....
do not trust the "paid" reviews in magazines..
honestly from my experience, i learned to read comments from ppl i trust. or i simply go buy the unit and try it out myself... it's been a long time that i haven't waste my money on stupid paid to write magazines...

if the writer LOVED the converters, i would like to know what he would say about the converters of rme, mr816, ensemble, 2626 etc..
then i would like to know what he would say about lavry, dbox's da, mytek, black lion... lol and i'm very carious to know what his current converters are

think of it this way, universal audio is one of the smartest companies out there in audio production business,
they are selling a single 710 for $800, they squeezed 3 more of these into a 4-710 box, kind of makes sence for $2000 (well not really) but even having a mid class converters (like rme, mr816) into the box is making me look for a catch.. since i'm pretty sure that the 710s in 4-710 sound exact the same as a single 710, there is no way u can make me convinced by having a mid class converters in that box.

however that's a fact for u to think

i personally used my ears and since i'm very familiar with the sound of 710, as soon as i used a 4-710 with its adat, i was like this>>>

[mikedboh]

wanted to throw in my 2c on the MR816 converter not being transparent. Remember that in his test he used the mic preamps on the MR816, not the inserts(albeit they are only on channels 1-2). Of course the mic pre's will color the sound. The mr816x is a rock solid unit.

[Beyersound]

Originally Posted by mikedboh

wanted to throw in my 2c on the MR816 converter not being transparent. Remember that in his test he used the mic preamps on the MR816, not the inserts(albeit they are only on channels 1-2). Of course the mic pre's will color the sound. The mr816x is a rock solid unit.

I totally forgot about that, you're right. The MR816 is an excellent sounding unit.

[Beyersound]

Originally Posted by janjaal

so as mr816....
do not trust the "paid" reviews in magazines..
honestly from my experience, i learned to read comments from ppl i trust. or i simply go buy the unit and try it out myself... it's been a long time that i haven't waste my money on stupid paid to write magazines...

if the writer LOVED the converters, i would like to know what he would say about the converters of rme, mr816, ensemble, 2626 etc..
then i would like to know what he would say about lavry, dbox's da, mytek, black lion... lol and i'm very carious to know what his current converters are

think of it this way, universal audio is one of the smartest companies out there in audio production business,
they are selling a single 710 for $800, they squeezed 3 more of these into a 4-710 box, kind of makes sence for $2000 (well not really) but even having a mid class converters (like rme, mr816) into the box is making me look for a catch.. since i'm pretty sure that the 710s in 4-710 sound exact the same as a single 710, there is no way u can make me convinced by having a mid class converters in that box.

however that's a fact for u to think

i personally used my ears and since i'm very familiar with the sound of 710, as soon as i used a 4-710 with its adat, i was like this>>>

Easy on the conspiracy theory..... As for the review in SOS, I own 2 MR816x. They were an upgrade from my excellent sounding Emu 1820m (same converters as the original PTHD 192), the same unit that SOS uses as their initial benchmark in most of their interface testing. I have been using similar Yamaha converters (to the MR816) in my large format digital consoles ($25k to 60k) for quite a while. I experienced the same listening observations as the SOS reviewer in my initial listening, the MR816 was substantially more open, transparent, better depth, was smoother and more natural sounding in the upper mids than the 1820m. I also have some Digi 192s, have and use a Radar (nothing is deeper, more open or detailed than Radar) on a daily basis. The MR816 sounds much closer to the Radar than the 192s. Nobody paid me, the MR816 is just plain good, and possibly one of the best values in audio.

[Beyersound]

Originally Posted by beingmf

Yeah, the funny detail about the MR816 "colouration" is the fact that only the AD is indeed coloured – in a way I personally like very much. Its DA is almost perfectly clean (I prefer it over RME as well...).

+1!

[adrianww]

Originally Posted by mikedboh

wanted to throw in my 2c on the MR816 converter not being transparent. Remember that in his test he used the mic preamps on the MR816, not the inserts(albeit they are only on channels 1-2). Of course the mic pre's will color the sound. The mr816x is a rock solid unit.

Not sure whether the results will look any different through the inserts to be honest. OK, so you bypass the pre, but you then have to run unbalanced so you're more prone to interference and cable difficulties. I don't know whether it's been tried both ways or not. However, I think there's a number of interfaces where you end up running through the pre (or through a padded-down pre, or through a separate pre/variable gain stage on the line input) that still outperform the MR in terms of that transparency test. Still, it might be interesting to see whether there's any general correspondence between the rankings in the test and those interfaces where you have to run through some kind of pre/variable gain stage versus those that have fixed line-level inputs.

But...having said all of that...

As I mentioned earlier, from my point of view, that doesn't make it bad. I don't know whether any artifacts that are introduced are even audible under normal listening conditions and I suspect that it still sounds just great - certainly far better than anything you could have bought even just five to ten years ago (well, without spending silly amounts of money anyway).

I know that I still like my n12 (the guts of which are almost certainly the origin of most of the circuitry in the MR) and I will probably continue to use it whenever the urge takes me. I also like my Focusrite LS56, which scores even worse in the transparency test (right at the bottom of the pile - and it was mine that was tested!) In fact, I prefer the LS56 to the n12 - it sounds just as good if not better and the drivers are better. (It was years of niggling little Yamaha/Steinberg firewire driver problems that made me look for an alternative in the first place.)

At the end of the day, we're in the Low End here. I'm still waiting for the transparency test thread to start putting Lavry Golds and Burls and what have you through their paces. Now that could really get interesting and put the cat right in amongst the pigeons!

[janjaal]

Originally Posted by Beyersound

Easy on the conspiracy theory..... As for the review in SOS, I own 2 MR816x. They were an upgrade from my excellent sounding Emu 1820m (same converters as the original PTHD 192), the same unit that SOS uses as their initial benchmark in most of their interface testing. I have been using similar Yamaha converters (to the MR816) in my large format digital consoles ($25k to 60k) for quite a while. I experienced the same listening observations as the SOS reviewer in my initial listening, the MR816 was substantially more open, transparent, better depth, was smoother and more natural sounding in the upper mids than the 1820m. I also have some Digi 192s, have and use a Radar (nothing is deeper, more open or detailed than Radar) on a daily basis. The MR816 sounds much closer to the Radar than the 192s. Nobody paid me, the MR816 is just plain good, and possibly one of the best values in audio.

please read my comment more accurately...
from what u just wrote, i believe you wrote about mr816. however my comment was about the converters of the ua 4-710 which is not even close to the converters of mr816... ad card in 4-710 is really crap...

and about paid comments. it made me feel like that when i read sos or any other magazines, and there is not even a bad review about gears, not even one. like i see so many ads about one gear in different magazines, and there are lots of good reviews about that same gear. then i go try the gear and my ears tell me that it was just pure advertizement for that gear... and guess what? no one ever talks about that gear after a month or two when the hype is done... i'm not trying to insult you or anyone else. it's just my personal opinion that i'm sharing here...

[smoovemode]

Originally Posted by janjaal

please read my comment more accurately...
from what u just wrote, i believe you wrote about mr816. however my comment was about the converters of the ua 4-710 which is not even close to the converters of mr816... ad card in 4-710 is really crap...

and about paid comments. it made me feel like that when i read sos or any other magazines, and there is not even a bad review about gears, not even one. like i see so many ads about one gear in different magazines, and there are lots of good reviews about that same gear. then i go try the gear and my ears tell me that it was just pure advertizement for that gear... and guess what? no one ever talks about that gear after a month or two when the hype is done... i'm not trying to insult you or anyone else. it's just my personal opinion that i'm sharing here...

would you say the converters in the Steinberg MR816 are better than the built in UA converters on the 4-710?

[Beyersound]

Originally Posted by janjaal

please read my comment more accurately...
from what u just wrote, i believe you wrote about mr816. however my comment was about the converters of the ua 4-710 which is not even close to the converters of mr816... ad card in 4-710 is really crap...

and about paid comments. it made me feel like that when i read sos or any other magazines, and there is not even a bad review about gears, not even one. like i see so many ads about one gear in different magazines, and there are lots of good reviews about that same gear. then i go try the gear and my ears tell me that it was just pure advertizement for that gear... and guess what? no one ever talks about that gear after a month or two when the hype is done... i'm not trying to insult you or anyone else. it's just my personal opinion that i'm sharing here...

It's cool, sorry that I misunderstood your post, it was late.....

[mikedboh]

I haven't heard them myself but I have read that the ua 4 710 has...'crappy' converters. not as good as u would expect. the mr816 is stellar in this regard.

[jeremy.c.]

Originally Posted by mikedboh

I haven't heard them myself but I have read that the ua 4 710 has...'crappy' converters. not as good as u would expect. the mr816 is stellar in this regard.

I have owned an embarrassing number of converters brought up in this thread... I just recorded with the 4-710 going into a Tascam board via ADAT too and didn't have any problems with the quality. I didn't AB them granted, but the tone coming out wasn't a problem.
I use the MR-816X primarily, but I also still have a Mytek AD, I barely use it.
I have owned Rosetta's 200 and 800 and the PSX-100 (favorite of those Apogee units), a Lynx Aurora 8, a BLA modded firewire 1814 (not worth it, though I hear the 002r is pretty smashing), an RME Multiface (solid) and any number of MOTU units. I also currently have a Focusrite Scarlett and it's good too.
My MR-816 is great in terms of AD/DA and preamps. If I really want something extra I'll use an SCA N72, A12, or J99 through the Mytek, but for general duties the 816 is fine. I just did music for an iOS game and I tracked the guitars and bass (no vox or drums, the synths were ITB) through the preamps/line ins on the MR816 exclusively. No issues.
I'm always a little bewildered when I start to hear about how "cloudy" certain converters are. I have had issues when pushing the lower level converters too hard, but it seems most stuff designed in the last 3 or 4 years has really transcended that. I don't think some of the differences are as great as some make them out to be.
I can't say much about the Saffire or the ADI-2, but the MR816 holds it's own against units generally considered nicer than those, though I doubt you'd go wrong with them either.

[smoovemode]

Originally Posted by jeremy.c.

I have owned an embarrassing number of converters brought up in this thread... I just recorded with the 4-710 going into a Tascam board via ADAT too and didn't have any problems with the quality. I didn't AB them granted, but the tone coming out wasn't a problem.
I use the MR-816X primarily, but I also still have a Mytek AD, I barely use it.
I have owned Rosetta's 200 and 800 and the PSX-100 (favorite of those Apogee units), a Lynx Aurora 8, a BLA modded firewire 1814 (not worth it, though I hear the 002r is pretty smashing), an RME Multiface (solid) and any number of MOTU units. I also currently have a Focusrite Scarlett and it's good too.
My MR-816 is great in terms of AD/DA and preamps. If I really want something extra I'll use an SCA N72, A12, or J99 through the Mytek, but for general duties the 816 is fine. I just did music for an iOS game and I tracked the guitars and bass (no vox or drums, the synths were ITB) through the preamps/line ins on the MR816 exclusively. No issues.
I'm always a little bewildered when I start to hear about how "cloudy" certain converters are. I have had issues when pushing the lower level converters too hard, but it seems most stuff designed in the last 3 or 4 years has really transcended that. I don't think some of the differences are as great as some make them out to be.
I can't say much about the Saffire or the ADI-2, but the MR816 holds it's own against units generally considered nicer than those, though I doubt you'd go wrong with them either.

There's one thing I am convinced of now and I haven't even got one yet. The Steinberg MR816 is the best interface to come out of the mid priced bunch. For every one person who talks smack about it, four others defend it! If I don't go "high end", I'm gonna get one.

[DonDraper]

+1 for the MR816, still using mine at the moment. Best bang for buck going around in my opinion. Very workable quality that is allowing me to save the extra cash for mics , mic pre's and other outboard gear in till I reach the point where i can afford and my skill level wants to work with more external per's. But for tracking guitars and vocals can't go wrong. Even recorded my whole band with 8ins for pre pro and we were very impressed.

[adrianww]

Originally Posted by smoovemode

There's one thing I am convinced of now and I haven't even got one yet. The Steinberg MR816 is the best interface to come out of the mid priced bunch. For every one person who talks smack about it, four others defend it! If I don't go "high end", I'm gonna get one.

If you include the Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56 in the mid-priced bunch (which I tend to do), then I'd say that it just pips the MR, but it's so close a call that it doesn't make a lot of difference. I think the MR's look like good interfaces - as I mentioned earlier, I have the interface that gave them most of their audio DNA so to speak (the Yamaha n12) and it's a close call between that and my LS56.

And, obviously, although I'm interested in that transparency test idea, I'm not letting it have too much influence on my own decisions - given that the LS56 is currently at the absolute bottom of the pile there!

[smoovemode]

Originally Posted by adrianww

If you include the Focusrite Liquid Saffire 56 in the mid-priced bunch (which I tend to do), then I'd say that it just pips the MR, but it's so close a call that it doesn't make a lot of difference. I think the MR's look like good interfaces - as I mentioned earlier, I have the interface that gave them most of their audio DNA so to speak (the Yamaha n12) and it's a close call between that and my LS56.

And, obviously, although I'm interested in that transparency test idea, I'm not letting it have too much influence on my own decisions - given that the LS56 is currently at the absolute bottom of the pile there!

I couldn't agree more. I had the LS56 and only sold it because I thought I was going to "upgrade" into an Apogee Ensemble. But, my gut kept telling me that the ensemble was not that much of an upgrade for 2x the price. If there's anything I have learned on GS is that you have "colored" and transparent sound. What I believe makes the LS56 and MR816 so appealing is their "flavor" is not a negative one, just like the apogee.

I may not run to these for Opera, Jazz or Classical. But, for about everything else, you would either welcome the flavor or not even notice it!

Someone will have a hard time convincing me that a Rap, Techno, Rock, Funk, Pop, Dubstep, Dancehall, Reggae, House listeners and Artist are going to notice or even care about some converters not being transparent? I Djed for 25 years with some great equipment. I never once heard someone walk up and say " That recording artist used some shitty converters in their mix". There's one recent RnB song where they actually mixed in hiss to give it a retro feel...Another again (John Legend).