Babyface, same converters as Fireface?

Mattchen · 5th April 2011

I just bought a Babyface cause I need a USB converter and wanted the Fireface but (1) only need one input and (2) wanted to save money if I could.
The person at the store said it was the exact same converter as the Fireface only less features...

Just wanted to double cross this with you guys; is that true?

And I don't know if within the Fireface line there are differences in the converters so let's just say the most basic Fireface UC one.

Thanks

Mattchen · 6th April 2011

bump, anyone know?

digigem · 19th August 2011

BF uses separate AD and DA chips, UC uses a combined AKM ADDA chip

RME User Forum / babyface / fireface UC questions

Bill@WelcomeHome · 19th August 2011

The Fireface doesn't have the same converters as the Fireface, depending upon when any particular Fireface was made. Like any other product, the circuitry went through changes over the life of the product.

AJ Reynolds · 19th August 2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill@WelcomeHome

The Fireface doesn't have the same converters as the Fireface, depending upon when any particular Fireface was made. Like any other product, the circuitry went through changes over the life of the product.

so do new ones sound better or worse than second hand?

Timur Born · 19th August 2011

Product pages, manuals (download) and a bit of thinking are your friends!

Babyface

Dynamic range AD: 108 dB RMS unweighted, 111 dBA
THD AD: < -100 dB (< 0.001 %)
THD+N AD: < -98 dB (< 0.0012 %)
Crosstalk AD: > 110 dB

Dynamic range DA: 112 dB RMS unweighted, 115 dBA
THD DA: < -104 dB (< 0.00063%)
THD+N DA: < -100 dB (< 0.001%)
Crosstalk DA: > 110 dB

Fireface UC

Dynamic range AD: 110 dB RMS unweighted, 113 dBA
THD AD: < -100 dB (< 0.001 %)
THD+N AD: < -98 dB (< 0.0012 %)
Crosstalk AD: > 110 dB

Dynamic range DA: 110 dB RMS unweighted, 113 dBA (unmuted)
THD DA: -100 dB (0.001 %)
THD+N DA: -96 dB (0.0015 %)
Crosstalk DA: > 110 dB

Fireface UFX

AD, Line In 1-8, rear

Signal to Noise ratio (SNR): 110 dB RMS unweighted, 113 dBA
THD: < -110 dB, < 0.00032 %
THD+N: < -104 dB, < 0.00063 %
Channel separation: > 110 dB

Microphone In 9-12, front
As AD, but: Signal to Noise ratio (SNR): 112 dB RMS unweighted, 115 dBA

DA, Line Out 3-8, rear

Dynamic range (DR): 115 dB RMS unweighted, 118 dBA
THD: -104 dB, < 0.00063 %
THD+N: -100 dB, < 0.001 %
Channel separation: > 110 dB

Don't know how to interpret these numbers? Then don't care! They are all fine and you probably will have a hard time noticing the nuances. UFX is best, Babyface and UC are up for a tie with some points here and some points there. Get the interface with the I/Os and price you need.

rksguit · 19th August 2011

Great! If its USB it's RME,........ Unless ya feel like waiting for 12core mobile phones![about the same time the other USB interface manufacturers catch up to RME, IMO!]

singsong · 22nd August 2011

DAC on the Babyface is better than on the UC.
The Babyface has the identical DA Chip as the Fireface UFX.
One can here a substantial difference between Babyface and FF UC (I have had both, now I only have the BF).

5th April 2011	#1
Mattchen Gear nut Joined: Oct 2010 Posts: 110 Thread Starter	Babyface, same converters as Fireface? I just bought a Babyface cause I need a USB converter and wanted the Fireface but (1) only need one input and (2) wanted to save money if I could. The person at the store said it was the exact same converter as the Fireface only less features... Just wanted to double cross this with you guys; is that true? And I don't know if within the Fireface line there are differences in the converters so let's just say the most basic Fireface UC one. Thanks

19th August 2011	#4
Bill@WelcomeHome Lives for gear Joined: Feb 2010 Posts: 4,188	The Fireface doesn't have the same converters as the Fireface, depending upon when any particular Fireface was made. Like any other product, the circuitry went through changes over the life of the product. __________________ "We have a situation where somebody has learned that 'tape' sounds good. Tape doesn't sound good. Tape sounds like crap. But sometimes good stuff gets put on tape." "Putting crap to tape...sounds like crap." Show business: we're all here because we're not all there. Resistance is not futile. It is voltage divided by current. "I do not think that the wireless waves I have discovered will have any practical application,..." Heinrich Rudolf Hertz

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Avid Mbox Pro same converters as HD192??	good musik	Rap + Hip Hop engineering & production	10	5th January 2011 10:01 PM
RME Hammerfall/Fireface - Same Converters	teachingking	So much gear, so little time!	1	4th December 2007 09:51 PM
A2D converter as good as...?	lucasmusic	So much gear, so little time!	8	7th August 2007 07:09 PM
focusrite saffire LE same converters as pro?	gizeh12	Low End Theory	3	19th July 2006 05:12 AM
KSP8 Users: are KSP8 converters as good as Apogee Rosetta 48 AD?	stoneblue	High end	4	17th December 2003 10:02 PM

6th April 2011	#2
Mattchen Gear nut Joined: Oct 2010 Posts: 110 Thread Starter	bump, anyone know?

19th August 2011	#3
digigem Gear nut Joined: Dec 2005 Location: London Posts: 102	BF uses separate AD and DA chips, UC uses a combined AKM ADDA chip RME User Forum / babyface / fireface UC questions

19th August 2011	#6
Timur Born Lives for gear Joined: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,429	Product pages, manuals (download) and a bit of thinking are your friends! Babyface Dynamic range AD: 108 dB RMS unweighted, 111 dBA THD AD: < -100 dB (< 0.001 %) THD+N AD: < -98 dB (< 0.0012 %) Crosstalk AD: > 110 dB Dynamic range DA: 112 dB RMS unweighted, 115 dBA THD DA: < -104 dB (< 0.00063%) THD+N DA: < -100 dB (< 0.001%) Crosstalk DA: > 110 dB Fireface UC Dynamic range AD: 110 dB RMS unweighted, 113 dBA THD AD: < -100 dB (< 0.001 %) THD+N AD: < -98 dB (< 0.0012 %) Crosstalk AD: > 110 dB Dynamic range DA: 110 dB RMS unweighted, 113 dBA (unmuted) THD DA: -100 dB (0.001 %) THD+N DA: -96 dB (0.0015 %) Crosstalk DA: > 110 dB Fireface UFX AD, Line In 1-8, rear Signal to Noise ratio (SNR): 110 dB RMS unweighted, 113 dBA THD: < -110 dB, < 0.00032 % THD+N: < -104 dB, < 0.00063 % Channel separation: > 110 dB Microphone In 9-12, front As AD, but: Signal to Noise ratio (SNR): 112 dB RMS unweighted, 115 dBA DA, Line Out 3-8, rear Dynamic range (DR): 115 dB RMS unweighted, 118 dBA THD: -104 dB, < 0.00063 % THD+N: -100 dB, < 0.001 % Channel separation: > 110 dB Don't know how to interpret these numbers? Then don't care! They are all fine and you probably will have a hard time noticing the nuances. UFX is best, Babyface and UC are up for a tie with some points here and some points there. Get the interface with the I/Os and price you need.

19th August 2011	#7
rksguit Lives for gear Joined: Apr 2011 Location: AUSTRALIA Posts: 1,295 1 Review written	Great! If its USB it's RME,........ Unless ya feel like waiting for 12core mobile phones![about the same time the other USB interface manufacturers catch up to RME, IMO!]

22nd August 2011	#8
singsong Gear Head Joined: Jan 2011 Posts: 56	DAC on the Babyface is better than on the UC. The Babyface has the identical DA Chip as the Fireface UFX. One can here a substantial difference between Babyface and FF UC (I have had both, now I only have the BF).