Firewire 800 vs 400

[TorchMusic]

Just got my Fireface 800 up & running on my PC laptop. I'm using a PCMCIA card with a Firewire 400 port on it. I noticed the LaCie FW800 card is pretty cheap. Is there a substantial difference between Firewire 400 and 800? Besides throughput, is there an improvement in latency?

[bandit]

i do not think so bro.

[ABGen]

If you are like me and probably most of the gear heads on here - you won't want to wonder in 3 or 6 months if any problems you might have were due to not spending $30 on the FW800 card. the FF800 works like a charm with my FW800 card - at 256buffers at 88.2Khz roudtrip latency about 8ms.

[kgdrum_nyc]

according to RME the only advantage to fw800 isif you are using multiple Fireface's.if you are just using 1 FF,you will not have a higher track count or any real benifits using FW 800 instead of FW 400.
But it is very important to have the FF on it's own FW bus,if you use FW hd's you should have a FW card to keep the FF and the HD's on different hd bus(you want to avoid FW bottleneck).
KG

[ABGen]

Originally Posted by kgdrum_nyc

according to RME the only advantage to fw800 isif you are using multiple Fireface's.if you are just using 1 FF,you will not have a higher track count or any real benifits using FW 800 instead of FW 400.
But it is very important to have the FF on it's own FW bus,if you use FW hd's you should have a FW card to keep the FF and the HD's on different hd bus(you want to avoid FW bottleneck).
KG

That's interesting. No wonder I don't have any problems running Kyma through FW400 and the FF800 on a separate FW800 card. I can run a Kyma session simultaneously as running a Cubase session - and can record out the FF800 through my Pendulum MDP1 and into Kyma.

it still doesnt make sense to me that the FW800 wouldn't provide better bandwidth - but if RME says it then you are the man

Thanks.

[kgdrum_nyc]

corrected :
But it is very important to have the FF on it's own FW bus,if you use FW hd's you should have a FW card to keep the FF and the HD's on different FW bus(you want to avoid FW bottleneck).
KG

[minus-sounds.com]

For about 9 months I was using a cheap PCMCIA FW card with VIA chipset with my FW800. No problems. In June I switched to the Lacie 800 PCMCIA card. Again no problems.

[theblotted]

FWIW, if you're using PTMP, it's good idea to keep all FW devices on FW400; don't mix and match FW800...

otherwise, major kernel problems. M-audio's got terrible software drivers.

[majortom]

Originally Posted by ABGen

it still doesnt make sense to me that the FW800 wouldn't provide better bandwidth - but if RME says it then you are the man
Thanks.

The way I understand it, FW800 does have more bandwidth, it's just not normally necessary. The pipe is bigger, so to speak, but FF800 has about the same latency as FW400, so the data doesn't reach the end of the pipe any faster. If the data flow doesn't consume the whole pipe available with FW400 then it's just as fast as FW800.

When you throw more tracks at it and exceed what FW400's bandwidth can process in one time chunk then FW800 can be said to be "faster" because it sends more data in the same amount of time.

What we need is a faster pipe, or more water pressure, or maybe even better tasting water... you get the point... right?

[edtex]

i think it's important to note that fw800 sounds different to fw400. a lot better to my ears. if you are recording and streaming your audio direct from a fw800 extrenal lacie drive, the sound is markedly clearer with extra definition and a broader stereo picture.

[sleepwalker]

Right. Other pearls of wisdom:

USB is hazier sounding than FW800 & External drives are "punchier" than internal drives

Originally Posted by edtex

i think it's important to note that fw800 sounds different to fw400. a lot better to my ears. if you are recording and streaming your audio direct from a fw800 extrenal lacie drive, the sound is markedly clearer with extra definition and a broader stereo picture.

[Toad]

Originally Posted by sleepwalker

Right. Other pearls of wisdom:

USB is hazier sounding than FW800 & External drives are "punchier" than internal drives

Also, remember to mount the drives vertically for maximum audio quality!! (& warmth)

[ABGen]

Originally Posted by sleepwalker

Right. Other pearls of wisdom:

USB is hazier sounding than FW800 & External drives are "punchier" than internal drives

LOL

too much and =

Crack is bad - don't smoke crack.

LOL

[kojak]

I found if I point my tower towards mecca, there's a bump in the lower mids, but only during Ramadan...also, if I turn the lights out and I'm wearing red, I get less ear fatigue vs. with a window open and wearing blue or green. This is all dependent on me operating my computer with only my toes, of course.

[ABGen]

Originally Posted by kojak

I found if I point my tower towards mecca, there's a bump in the lower mids, but only during Ramadan...also, if I turn the lights out and I'm wearing red, I get less ear fatigue vs. with a window open and wearing blue or green. This is all dependent on me operating my computer with only my toes, of course.

Yes, the toes are the key

[edtex]

thanks for the sarcasm. i take it none of you have bothered to do a fw400/800 comparison then? and there i was thinking this forum was for people who were interested in sound.

[theblotted]

Originally Posted by edtex

thanks for the sarcasm. i take it none of you have bothered to do a fw400/800 comparison then? and there i was thinking this forum was for people who were interested in sound.

it sure is if you know where to look!

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/search.php