My old MOTU 2408 performs better than my Fireface?

pabelius · 18th September 2006

Hello all.

So I've been happily using my RME Fireface for the last year- very happy with the sound. However, it did not occur to me that my glitching and processing power problems with soft synths in Logic had anything to do with my audio interface until my partner, who has the exact same computer system as I do, flawlessly was able to play so many more soft synths than I. The different thing outside the computer itself? The interface. He's still on a MOTU 2408 MK I. I swapped out my Fireface for the MOTU and BAM! I instantly had so much more available to me. I thought for a long time my problems were from a deficiency in my computer- that I needed a QUAD or 4 GB's of RAM. But honestly, now I'm able to do most of what I need to do without hang ups. Of course, the sound quality sucks in comparison, but working is so much easier.

The Fireface was on a dedicated FW PCI card, on the bottom most slot possible, the first port, with nothing else on that card. I tried plugging the FW directly into the top main FW port on the G4, but it didn't make a bit of difference. When using a certain amount of soft synths (heavy ones like Storm Drum and other East West stuff) I would get clicks, blips, glitches, stops, errors like "conflict between Logic and external device."

So how is it that MOTU did such a better job in crafting a PCI card than a standard FW PCI card? What can I do? Is there a card that people recommend using for more throughput when using FW audio interfaces? How exactly does this work? What's my best option?

Once again I'm forced to rethink my system. I had no idea that my processing problems in Logic had everything to do with the INTERFACE!!

Thanks for any help/suggestions in advance.

stag · 18th September 2006

Sincerely i´m not a fan of the FireFace too.
Much, much better sounding and more performance Mackie Onyx 400f, on my putes.
The one i´m going to get to substitute the FF is the TC konnect, on paper it seems to be by far the best speced of them all.

Also a solution that migth interest you since you like FF sound so much, is to get a decent PCI interface and sync it with the FF, there you got a lot more performance for a resonable low sum.

Bye.

pabelius · 20th September 2006

Thanks, Stag.

Anyone else have any suggestions or similar problems?

thermos · 21st September 2006

If you are using DP you have to set the work priority to medium.

That will help a lot.

pabelius · 22nd September 2006

I'm using Logic.

gramps · 22nd September 2006

are/were you using the 400 or 800 fw connection? with rme the 400 works best.

g

RME Support · 22nd September 2006

Hello,

Quote:

Originally Posted by pabelius

I had no idea that my processing problems in Logic had everything to do with the INTERFACE!!

They don't - at least not directly. Neither of these two does any plugin processing. The fundamental difference here is that one is a PCI interface and the other one is Firewire. Esp. on an older Mac (you didn't mention details of yours), this may make a certain difference, since Firewire itself does cause a certain CPU overhead here, as does the number of audio channels under Core Audio - this isn't Fireface-specific.
If you're not using all channels, try reducing them with the "Limit Bandwidth" option in the Fireface settings. This could help a bit.

Regards,
Daniel Fuchs
RME

RME Support · 22nd September 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by gramps

with rme the 400 works best.g

That's news to me...

Regards,
Daniel Fuchs
RME

dubrichie · 22nd September 2006

what buffer settings were you using?

have you tried increasing it in the FF control panel?

regards,

richie.

gramps · 23rd September 2006

that's what we were told by...RME and not to use the front input on the mac but the rear.

g

pabelius · 1st October 2006

I've limited bandwidth to just Analog 1-8, and the buffer size is at 1024. I'm using FW 400. RME told me there was no difference between The port didn't matter- if it was on my pci fw expansion card or on the natural port on the back.

However, now I'm thinking it might be that I'm already overloading the fw bus in general on my computer, and my pci bus is maxed out because I have a SATA raid hooked up via pci where my projects live. So there's a ton of bandwidth being soaked up. However, that still doesn't explain why the MOTU pci is performing so much better.

My computer set up is thus:

Dual 1 Ghz G4 MDD
2 GB RAM
OS X 10.3.8

I also have 4 external hard drives hooked up fw, and a video converter box on a port. And before I put the MOTU back in, I had a pci fw card that had the RME on it, and a SATA pci card that hooked up to a two drive array (software controlled) that had my projects on it.

So...I'm just confused and haven't been able to use the RME on this project.

18th September 2006	#1
pabelius Gear Head Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 43 Thread Starter	My old MOTU 2408 performs better than my Fireface? Hello all. So I've been happily using my RME Fireface for the last year- very happy with the sound. However, it did not occur to me that my glitching and processing power problems with soft synths in Logic had anything to do with my audio interface until my partner, who has the exact same computer system as I do, flawlessly was able to play so many more soft synths than I. The different thing outside the computer itself? The interface. He's still on a MOTU 2408 MK I. I swapped out my Fireface for the MOTU and BAM! I instantly had so much more available to me. I thought for a long time my problems were from a deficiency in my computer- that I needed a QUAD or 4 GB's of RAM. But honestly, now I'm able to do most of what I need to do without hang ups. Of course, the sound quality sucks in comparison, but working is so much easier. The Fireface was on a dedicated FW PCI card, on the bottom most slot possible, the first port, with nothing else on that card. I tried plugging the FW directly into the top main FW port on the G4, but it didn't make a bit of difference. When using a certain amount of soft synths (heavy ones like Storm Drum and other East West stuff) I would get clicks, blips, glitches, stops, errors like "conflict between Logic and external device." So how is it that MOTU did such a better job in crafting a PCI card than a standard FW PCI card? What can I do? Is there a card that people recommend using for more throughput when using FW audio interfaces? How exactly does this work? What's my best option? Once again I'm forced to rethink my system. I had no idea that my processing problems in Logic had everything to do with the INTERFACE!! Thanks for any help/suggestions in advance.

22nd September 2006	#9
dubrichie Lives for gear Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Dublin, Ireland Posts: 2,319	what buffer settings were you using? have you tried increasing it in the FF control panel? regards, richie. __________________ Regards, Richie. "a paradigm of restraint and good taste at a time of frequent excess"

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

18th September 2006	#2
stag Lives for gear Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Over myself Posts: 929	Sincerely i´m not a fan of the FireFace too. Much, much better sounding and more performance Mackie Onyx 400f, on my putes. The one i´m going to get to substitute the FF is the TC konnect, on paper it seems to be by far the best speced of them all. Also a solution that migth interest you since you like FF sound so much, is to get a decent PCI interface and sync it with the FF, there you got a lot more performance for a resonable low sum. Bye.

20th September 2006	#3
pabelius Gear Head Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 43 Thread Starter	Thanks, Stag. Anyone else have any suggestions or similar problems?

21st September 2006	#4
thermos Lives for gear Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Brooklyn Posts: 3,552	If you are using DP you have to set the work priority to medium. That will help a lot.

22nd September 2006	#6
gramps Gear maniac Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 241	are/were you using the 400 or 800 fw connection? with rme the 400 works best. g

23rd September 2006	#10
gramps Gear maniac Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 241	that's what we were told by...RME and not to use the front input on the mac but the rear. g

1st October 2006	#11
pabelius Gear Head Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 43 Thread Starter	I've limited bandwidth to just Analog 1-8, and the buffer size is at 1024. I'm using FW 400. RME told me there was no difference between The port didn't matter- if it was on my pci fw expansion card or on the natural port on the back. However, now I'm thinking it might be that I'm already overloading the fw bus in general on my computer, and my pci bus is maxed out because I have a SATA raid hooked up via pci where my projects live. So there's a ton of bandwidth being soaked up. However, that still doesn't explain why the MOTU pci is performing so much better. My computer set up is thus: Dual 1 Ghz G4 MDD 2 GB RAM OS X 10.3.8 I also have 4 external hard drives hooked up fw, and a video converter box on a port. And before I put the MOTU back in, I had a pci fw card that had the RME on it, and a SATA pci card that hooked up to a two drive array (software controlled) that had my projects on it. So...I'm just confused and haven't been able to use the RME on this project.