ProFire 2626

[WizProdux]

So I used an weaky laptop (Pentium M 1.7GHz/504 MB RAM) and recorded a symphonic band using 7 mics ( 2 over the conductor, 2 on the sides, 3 for the percs) to Pro Tools M-Powered 7.4cs4......it worked flawlessly.
ROCK SOLID!!!
NO CRASH or GLITCHES.


The Recording.

I made sure that I got a good recording level without clipping at sound check. One thing I noticed was that when there was silence, the preamps where extremely quiet (more than I was used to with other preamps).
The noise floor on these pre's are really good. Great dynamic range.
The only part where the mics clipped. There is a percussion instrument called the "... whip" that thing was loud with sharp transients. Other than the quality was real good, next step is to master it using iZotope Ozone 3.
Another thing I noticed while recording was that the headphone volume is real loud, which is real good when you're monitoring through headphones while in the same room as the band.

[jeronimo]

Originally Posted by WizProdux

So I used an weaky laptop (Pentium M 1.7GHz/504 MB RAM) and recorded a symphonic band using 7 mics ( 2 over the conductor, 2 on the sides, 3 for the percs) to Pro Tools M-Powered 7.4cs4......it worked flawlessly.
ROCK SOLID!!!
NO CRASH or GLITCHES.


The Recording.

I made sure that I got a good recording level without clipping at sound check. One thing I noticed was that when there was silence, the preamps where extremely quiet (more than I was used to with other preamps).
The noise floor on these pre's are really good. Great dynamic range.
The only part where the mics clipped. There is a percussion instrument called the "... whip" that thing was loud with sharp transients. Other than the quality was real good, next step is to master it using iZotope Ozone 3.
Another thing I noticed while recording was that the headphone volume is real loud, which is real good when you're monitoring through headphones while in the same room as the band.

Can we hear it?

[Dean7]

Originally Posted by jeronimo

Can we hear it?

My thoughts exactly!

[mlange]

Sorry for the hijack, but we're stumped.....

Hey all 2626 owners.....

My unit reads -18VU on a +4dBu line level signal inputted to any of the 8 TRS channel inputs. We've tried mono and TRS cables from variety of line level signal sources & test gear and the results are always the same.... an enemic signal level of -18VU from the 2626 as reported by ProTools.

As there's no adjustment to the line levels' inputs, has anyone else run a line level signal and checked their 2626's performance? Can anybody get something remotely close to 0VU via the line input??

Thanks!

[mortimer]

Originally Posted by mlange

Sorry for the hijack, but we're stumped.....

Hey all 2626 owners.....

My unit reads -18VU on a +4dBu line level signal inputted to any of the 8 TRS channel inputs. We've tried mono and TRS cables from variety of line level signal sources & test gear and the results are always the same.... an enemic signal level of -18VU from the 2626 as reported by ProTools.

As there's no adjustment to the line levels' inputs, has anyone else run a line level signal and checked their 2626's performance? Can anybody get something remotely close to 0VU via the line input??

Thanks!

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but isn't a 0VU signal supposed to read as -18dBFS, since 0dBFS is where your signal will clip? I believe this is done on purpose, to give you some headroom above the "normal" signal level.

[leigh]

Originally Posted by mlange

My unit reads -18VU on a +4dBu line level signal inputted to any of the 8 TRS channel inputs. We've tried mono and TRS cables from variety of line level signal sources & test gear and the results are always the same.... an enemic signal level of -18VU from the 2626 as reported by ProTools.

As the previous poster mentioned, this is the built-in headroom on the Profire's converters. If your console or other analog output is showing a 0VU output, you want it to show up at the Profire looking like -18VU. If 0VU showed up as 0dbFS, you'd have no headroom at all above 0VU analog!

If that looks, or more importantly, sounds, "enemic" [sic] to you, then raise the level of your analog stages prior to hitting the converters. Nothing wrong with leaving some headroom in the box, however, if you're running 24 bit sessions.

[mlange]

Originally Posted by leigh

As the previous poster mentioned, this is the built-in headroom on the Profire's converters. If your console or other analog output is showing a 0VU output, you want it to show up at the Profire looking like -18VU. If 0VU showed up as 0dbFS, you'd have no headroom at all above 0VU analog!

If that looks, or more importantly, sounds, "enemic" [sic] to you, then raise the level of your analog stages prior to hitting the converters. Nothing wrong with leaving some headroom in the box, however, if you're running 24 bit sessions.

Sorry Leigh - I poured through the posts buy cannot locate the section you reference.

When looking to line-level inputs on other products we've gotten levels on par other standard references. As a broad generalization, ProTools seems to treat -2VU as 0VU, so this means the +4dBu signal inputted to the 2626 is ultimately recorded by ProTools at -20VU!

Feel free to shoot this down, I'm just reporting what we've found to date.

[leigh]

Originally Posted by mlange

Sorry Leigh - I poured through the posts buy cannot locate the section you reference.

When looking to line-level inputs on other products we've gotten levels on par other standard references. As a broad generalization, ProTools seems to treat -2VU as 0VU, so this means the +4dBu signal inputted to the 2626 is ultimately recorded by ProTools at -20VU!

Feel free to shoot this down, I'm just reporting what we've found to date.

By "previous poster", I meant the post right before mine (and right after yours). I was just acknowledging their contribution to the discussion, not saying that you could have seen it before writing your post.

Not trying to shoot you down. But while you seem to be dissatisfied with the Profire's input levels, I'm not sure what you think it *should* be doing. How hot should a +4dBu signal appear on a digital scale? With 24 bit sessions being the standard these days, -18 dBFS seems reasonable to me. What has been your experience with the other products you mention?

Leigh

[JonesH]

So... What's the up and up on the firewire hotswap thing? I've only seen one other piece of gear that specifies the need to whut down the entire computer in order to plug in or plug out the unit, and I think it's bull.

However, both the other unit (a sounddevice 702) and the 2626 mentions that this is not needed in most cases but (I guess!) hotswapping has 'in some cases' for the Sd702 rendered both machine and computer unusable.

The FW protocol, AFAIK, specifies the compatibility with hotswapping units, and the manual mentions strict adherence to the 1394 protocol next to warning us not to hotswap.

So what's the unofficial take on this? Ray, can you perhaps shed some more light?

Thank you.

(Btw, I recorded a chamber orchestra in the concert hall of Piteå last week. The unit performed flawlessly. Good sound.)

[mlange]

Originally Posted by leigh

By "previous poster", I meant the post right before mine (and right after yours). I was just acknowledging their contribution to the discussion, not saying that you could have seen it before writing your post.

Not trying to shoot you down. But while you seem to be dissatisfied with the Profire's input levels, I'm not sure what you think it *should* be doing. How hot should a +4dBu signal appear on a digital scale? With 24 bit sessions being the standard these days, -18 dBFS seems reasonable to me. What has been your experience with the other products you mention?

Leigh

OK - picked-up an M-Audio Firewire Audiophile for a test - same system, configuration, etc.

Signal tester into analog line input #1 - and this interface is reporting what I thought should be seeing: +4dBu line level signal meters within ProTools as -1.7 VU - every input, every time.

It's not dissatisfaction - I'm concerned about malfunction ;) ..... So once again, are all 2626s faulted or is mine the only one with a low line-level input level?

Originally Posted by mortimer

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but isn't a 0VU signal supposed to read as -18dBFS, since 0dBFS is where your signal will clip? I believe this is done on purpose, to give you some headroom above the "normal" signal level.

Again, I was saying that the +4dBu line level source was recorded as a -18VU signal, not dBFS - correct me if I'm wrong, but within ProTools isn't it
-18VU = -36dBFS? ProTools is setup as 0VU = -18dBFS, but normally a +4dBu signal will read near 0VU.

With my 2626 we're talking a low, low line-level level.

[lafours]

Just wondering if the profire 2626 is compatible with the new agere chipset imacs? Any one have any experience.

[stingray1122]

So... What's the up and up on the firewire hotswap thing?

All of our FireWire product adhere to the protocol. And yes the protocol does specific the ability to hot swap. While functionally this works there are cases where the hardware can experience a power spike or short that can damage your computer and/or FireWire device. We get calls on occasion from users with fried units from hot swapping. It's not something related to our design or implementation of FireWire in fact it can happen with ANY FireWire device including hard drives. We put the warning with our products to help people from unknowingly damaging their gear. It's a rare occurrence but frustrating enough to our users that they should have a heads up that a problem is possible.

RayT

[leigh]

Thanks, Ray, that's a nice & clear explanation of why M-Audio hardware has all those warnings about hot-swapping.

Now, if they would just include the paragraph you wrote in their docs, even in small type or whatever under the Big Warning Label, that would improve users' confidence in their new shining piece of hardware. As it stands, my and many others' thoughts ran in the direction of "well, what did those M-Audio engineers forget to include in their design, that makes this particular hardware especially fragile?"

Just sayin'...

cheers,
Leigh

[mlange]

Ray-

Have you checked the +4dBu-line level inputs on a production model?

Thanks

[stingray1122]

Ray-

Have you checked the +4dBu-line level inputs on a production model?

Thanks

No I haven't had a chance to look into this yet. I realistically won't have an opportunity to do this until next week. I hope you can wait that long.

Now, if they would just include the paragraph you wrote in their docs, even in small type or whatever under the Big Warning Label, that would improve users' confidence in their new shining piece of hardware.

Sounds good to me ;) I'll see what I can do.

RayT

[mlange]

Originally Posted by stingray1122

No I haven't had a chance to look into this yet. I realistically won't have an opportunity to do this until next week. I hope you can wait that long. RayT

Thanks Ray - we'll look forward to your test results.

[fizzler]

does the 2626 use the same firmware on mac/pc (bootcamp) or does it have to be flashed everytime you switch platforms (like the fw 1814/fw audiophile)?

tia, fizzler

[JonesH]

Interesting thing about daisy-chaining; I find that the ProFire only works with my Macbook (wich only has one FW port) & LaCie harddrive when I connect the ProFire to my MacBook and then connect my harddrive to the ProFire (MacBook->PF2626->Harddrive)

If I connect the harddrive to the computer and then connect the 2626 (Computer->Harddrive->PF2626) Pro Tools refuses to launch and hangs at "Creating DAE Objects".

Anyone else experience the same things?

[jeronimo]

Originally Posted by JonesH

Interesting thing about daisy-chaining; I find that the ProFire only works with my Macbook (wich only has one FW port) & LaCie harddrive when I connect the ProFire to my MacBook and then connect my harddrive to the ProFire (MacBook->PF2626->Harddrive)

If I connect the harddrive to the computer and then connect the 2626 (Computer->Harddrive->PF2626) Pro Tools refuses to launch and hangs at "Creating DAE Objects".

Anyone else experience the same things?

this kind of stuff happens with FW devices...

[jonesboy]

Just picked mine up yesterday. I have no problems running Pro Tools M-Powered at 128 sample buffers for medium-intensity tracks on my MBP (2.2GHz, 2GB RAM). I'm leaving it at 256 samples for now to avoid dropouts on softsynth-heavy tracks. I've got my LaCIE drive connected to the FW800 port and the 2626 connected to the FW400 port on my notebook.

I was initially having some stability issues, but they seem to have been cured by shutting off the WiFi card. It's funny to watch the activity monitor for network activity and hearing a drop-out every time the WiFi card sends something.

I am able to record 16 tracks @ 48kHz/24b simultaneously into M-Powered with practically no CPU load. Recording 12 tracks @ 96kHz/24b is the same result.

This is very exciting. The converters seem to be very transparent for both recording and playback; the headphone outputs are clean, clear and loud; the noise floor is practically imperceptible; the build quality is very good. The preamps are loud, transparent and quiet.

My only beef is the knobs. They are both ugly and cheap-feeling. That's about the lowest thing on my "give a shit about" list, though.

edit: One other beef: the line-lump power supply is obviously a PWM-style step-down converter; I can hear the conversion circuit operating when the PS is on my desk (I have extremely sensitive ears, especially for this type of noise). I can actually detect the sound of the PS through my NT1-A and headphones when monitoring through the 2626, but only if I put the mic within 2" of the PS. :)

-Matt

[crossroad]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

I have no problems I am able to record 16 tracks @ 48kHz/24b simultaneously into M-Powered with practically no CPU load. Recording 12 tracks @ 96kHz/24b is the same result.

-Matt

Matt, was this done with H/W buffersize 256 samples?

[DrSyn]

Just received my 2626 and have been using it for about a day now. I've come across a major problem:

In OSX my latency is as follows (@44.1) in Cubase 4.13 in OSX 10.5.1

128 samples 7.89ms
192 samples 9.342ms
256 samples 10.794ms

What's going on? This is double what it should be. Even my Motif XS8 which has fairly crappy latency compared to other interfaces as the following:

128 samples: 3.91
192 5.4ms
256 6.8ms

Any idea how I can fix this? It looks literally double the latency of what it should be and makes this interface fairly useless.

Help!

Thanks,
Greg

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by crossroad

Matt, was this done with H/W buffersize 256 samples?

With 128 samples, actually. I only bumped the buffer to 256 (and then to 512) when I had a lot of CPU-hungry softsynths on the go.

-Matt

[crossroad]

Not Bad, 16 tracks 128H/W buffersize.

I also use a lot of virtual instruments so i guess i also need to toggle between buffers.

I don't record that many channels at the same time but at least the 2626 is able to do it.

After this report i feel safe to pick up a unit next week.

[Yung]

still no sound clips???? is it competing with 002 with black lion mod as far as sound qaulity???

[Dean7]

Originally Posted by Yung

still no sound clips???? is it competing with 002 with black lion mod as far as sound qaulity???

My thoughts exactly. Sound clips would be nice!

Anyway, I'm pulling the trigger on a 2626 today from Sweetwater, so I'll be able to post something soon.

-Dean

[leigh]

Originally Posted by Yung

still no sound clips???? is it competing with 002 with black lion mod as far as sound qaulity???

Sound clips of what? Do companies usually make example sound clips for converters?

[DrSyn]

Anyone else care to share their OSX latencies as reported by Cubase at various buffer sizes? mLan is literally half the latency.. I just want to know if its just my setup or if its the drivers themselves?

[Yung]

Originally Posted by leigh

Sound clips of what? Do companies usually make example sound clips for converters?

simple.. sound clips of recording and the exact recording chain that was used.. wouldnt mind hearing some comparisons between the sound qaulity compared to some of the other interfaces like rme.. ( if it even ranks up that high.) or if it can compete with a bla modded 002.. or so forth.. how is this thing ranking up??

I mean should ppl expect the same qaulity of sound as the previous interfaces( which many ppl seem to be unhappy with the factory outputs) and look for future mods like better converters or pre's, or does it pack the punch to stand up to an apogee's rosetta( which i doubt but you get my drift)?

[leigh]

Originally Posted by Yung

simple.. sound clips of recording and the exact recording chain that was used.. wouldnt mind hearing some comparisons between the sound qaulity compared to some of the other interfaces like rme.. ( if it even ranks up that high.) or if it can compete with a bla modded 002.. or so forth.. how is this thing ranking up??

I mean should ppl expect the same qaulity of sound as the previous interfaces( which many ppl seem to be unhappy with the factory outputs) and look for future mods like better converters or pre's, or does it pack the punch to stand up to an apogee's rosetta( which i doubt but you get my drift)?

Well, OK, but it doesn't actually sound all that simple. For the first type of clip, to try to "hear" the input conversion, the rest of the recording chain, as well as the source material, will completely dwarf the effect of the converters themselves. It would have to be the same performance and recording chain, then split simultaneously to both the 2626 and another converter. But then, what do you pick for the other converter/s? Maybe stack it up against a Black Lion 002, an Apogee, and a Mytek. OK, it's just gotten really complicated, and who's got time to do that kind of test, one that is still only going to produce marginal results for people who *really* know well the sound of the conversion on the comparison units.

Producing clips to show the sound of the outputs would be even harder.

If you're in the market, I would order a 2626 from somewhere that you can return it. Do whatever tests are relevant to you, which would be different from what's relevant to the next person. Then keep it or return it...

cheers,
Leigh