RME Fireface UFX

[Mats H]

I just made two TouchOSC presets so you can control your UFX (or any Totalmix FX equipped interface) from an Iphone. Please try it out and see if you find it useful.

RME's Fireface UFX is more then just an interface it is a standalone recorder

This is short Youtube vid that shows my template.

TotalmixPhone on Iphone using TouchOSC - YouTube

[tws]

Originally Posted by improziv

Is the serial number recent enough so that it works with the new controller? Is it a sealed new unit? I'm considering it too but not sure about this seller yet.

Thanks

It is a new sealed unit. Not sure about the serial, it's in my rack and I haven't checked on that.

I'd feel confident ordering from them again, but you're not guaranteed to get the quick turnaround and delivery time you get other dealers. In the case of my UFX, it had to be shipped to them for QC and packing then shipped me.

[Category 5]

Originally Posted by improziv

Is the serial number recent enough so that it works with the new controller? Is it a sealed new unit? I'm considering it too but not sure about this seller yet.

Thanks

Hellomusic is great. They are totally reliable and legit. New merchandise, but true they ship a little slow. GREAT deals. I check every day.

[Red Baron]

It´s said that UFX dsp effects are usable, but I can´t help thinking that RME, as a great company that it is, should be able to offer top quality dsp effects, as good as UA, instead of just usable. I wish they would work on better effects, that way UFX would become as attractive as Apollo on this matter.

As a matter of fact, RME is great updating drivers, so offering top effects is possible, but I don´t know if they have in mind such a big update, I hope they read this long thread from time to time.

I haven´t still decided what audio interface to buy, it would be a deciding factor for potential customers as me, since Apollo seems to be great and offers a lot of things too.

UFX number of sold units would increase even more.

Please, RME, give us top effects and dynamic tools (reverb, eq, compressor,....)!

[WKG]

Is anybody else using the new ARC controller yet? I got one in last week, really well made and easily tweakable. It's a great assist when running a session, mixing etc.

[Mats H]

Originally Posted by Red Baron

It´s said that UFX dsp effects are usable, but I can´t help thinking that RME, as a great company that it is, should be able to offer top quality dsp effects, as good as UA, instead of just usable. I wish they would work on better effects, that way UFX would become as attractive as Apollo on this matter.

As a matter of fact, RME is great updating drivers, so offering top effects is possible, but I don´t know if they have in mind such a big update, I hope they read this long thread from time to time.

I haven´t still decided what audio interface to buy, it would be a deciding factor for potential customers as me, since Apollo seems to be great and offers a lot of things too.

UFX number of sold units would increase even more.

Please, RME, give us top effects and dynamic tools (reverb, eq, compressor,....)!

They have already answered these kinds of requests in their own forum (which is quite good imo) and their standard answer is that they won't. The feature set with dynamic processing, EQ and reverb is a basic set of processors that work well for monitoring and in basic live sound settings, it's not meant as a recording mixer with lots of inserts. Maybe in a future version but the DSP is quite maxed out at the moment. Also I'd hate for a crappy VST plugin to crash my live mixer...

Why not just get yourself a UAD card to go with your UFX? I don't think RME have the resources to put out a brand new DSP platform. Just look at what happened to TC Electronic's Powercore and other proprietary DSP cards. I'd rather use something that has a fair share of the market so that I in five or ten years still can use the plugins. That's one reason I use native plugins. Another reason is that a big part of my work is one to two hour concerts and I'd hate to have to mix them down in real time just because of a DSP card.

[Red Baron]

Thanks Matt

Did they definetely close the door to that possibility, as saying, never? or
Did they say they currently have no plans to do that, as saying, time will tell ?

[Myriad_Rocker]

Originally Posted by WKG

Is anybody else using the new ARC controller yet? I got one in last week, really well made and easily tweakable. It's a great assist when running a session, mixing etc.

I just got mine today! Had to send my UFX in for the mod so I got both of those back from Synthax today. About a week on turn around time, not bad.

[WKG]

Originally Posted by Myriad_Rocker

I just got mine today! Had to send my UFX in for the mod so I got both of those back from Synthax today. About a week on turn around time, not bad.

It's really easy to reconfigure as well for tracking or mixing duties as needed. The preprinted decals were a nice touch in case you want to rename the buttons. Looks much better than tape and a sharpie.

[ACMike]

I know there are lots of ways to control the UFX through wireless.
I am especially exited about studying Matts's post on Totalmix over WiFi using OSC .

But I'm wondering if anyone has tried connecting the UFX to a wireless USB router like the Dlink 655, and controlling totalmix through a laptop/touchpad via wifi.

Here's a link about a guy controlling an 01V96 in that manner:
01v96 video - YouTube

Any thoughts?

[msmales555]

I currently have a FF800 and love it. But, before I pull the trigger and buy the UFX I had a question.

Can you record to a USB stick/external hard drive and to a computer simultaneously? I would like to use the USB stick as a back-up in case of a computer glitch/skip/crackle/etc.

If you can do this, do you have dto record to the computer via USB or can you record to the computer using firewire 400 and also record to the USB stick/hdd at the same time?

Thanks!

[Greg B]

Originally Posted by msmales555

I currently have a FF800 and love it. But, before I pull the trigger and buy the UFX I had a question.

Can you record to a USB stick/external hard drive and to a computer simultaneously? I would like to use the USB stick as a back-up in case of a computer glitch/skip/crackle/etc.

If you can do this, do you have dto record to the computer via USB or can you record to the computer using firewire 400 and also record to the USB stick/hdd at the same time?

Thanks!

Yes, it works wonderfully. You can use the USB or Firewire 400 connections on the back of the UFX at the same time you're using the USB on the front for your drive. I have a little 32-Gig HP flash drive that I connect to the front of the UFX when I'm doing on location recording and I record to my MacBook Pro and the USB drive simultaneously. I've recorded 20 tracks of 24/96 for over 5 hours without a single error on either.

[JustDucky]

I've had my UFX for about 6 months or so and I have nothing but good things to say about it. I have a Focusrite Octopre and an Art Tube Opto 8 on the two ADAT channels and I have had no problems recording and playing back 24 channels at a time at 44.1K 16 bits.

Running it at 192K gives you a markedly better sound quality, which I find handy for recording chamber music due to the channel limits.

Neither of my other cards are remarkable except that the Focusrite seems to be invincible to over-recording. I have had LOUD drummers in the studio, real thrashers, and sat there watching the card's meters peg and yet I don't hear any distortion. So that's handy.

If you are looking for a really solid piece of gear with versatile controls (TotalMix is a gas!) and great converters without having to pay boutique prices, then this is your piece.

Love it.

[UltimateOutsider]

I am looking to replace my MOTU UltraLite mk3 (the FireWire 400-only model) with the UFX, but there are two things I haven't been able to figure out from specs and reviews:

1. How long does the UFX take to boot up once it's powered on? I have to wait around 15 seconds for the UltraLite to start up before I can launch Live or Cubase.

2. Below is a snapshot of my latency numbers at 512 samples with the MOTU on my current Windows 7 system. Am I likely to see a latency improvement with the UFX? (What kind of numbers do you get at X samples?)

[Mats H]

Originally Posted by UltimateOutsider

I am looking to replace my MOTU UltraLite mk3 (the FireWire 400-only model) with the UFX, but there are two things I haven't been able to figure out from specs and reviews:

1. How long does the UFX take to boot up once it's powered on? I have to wait around 15 seconds for the UltraLite to start up before I can launch Live or Cubase.

2. Below is a snapshot of my latency numbers at 512 samples with the MOTU on my current Windows 7 system. Am I likely to see a latency improvement with the UFX? (What kind of numbers do you get at X samples?)

1. About 6.5 seconds.

2. I use mine at 96 KHz 1024 samples, 48 at 512. Now these are more of default settings, as I don't really care bout latency for my live recordings. I use Totalmix for 3 sample latency... sooo with the low latency A/D & D/A converters, that's less than a ms at 44.1 or 48 KHz from analog to analog. But you should be able to put it at 128 samples ASIO latency without too much effort. It depends more on the other drivers and hardware in your system.

[jwork123nl]

hi guys,

First post for me, just to ask this question.
I am wondering if the UFX / UCX is usable as a stand-alone 2.1 controller.
For this I need of course the high pass functionality for the main speakers.
But, importantly, I need to be able to group the main and subwoofer
channels to control the volume of all speakers with the remote control
or front knob.
Naturally this requires the fader grouping to exist also in stand-alone mode.

As posted here on the RME forum, I found out
that fader groups are not present when the UCX is used in stand-alone mode.

Can someone with an UFX see if that is the case also with a UFX?
Are you able to use fader groups in stand-alone mode? Am I doing something wrong here?

[dejazz]

Just to share about latency. I recently bought a USB 3.0 expresscard that has fresco logic fl1100 chipset. My rme ufx was only able to use with the minimum latency 128 samples with the onboard USB 2.0. Now, I am able to use my virtual instrument @ 48 samples. If using kontakt 5 with multi-streaming libraries, 64 samples is still smooth with no pop & crack. I am using a 3.5 years old laptop btw


Sent from my GT-N7000

[Mats H]

Originally Posted by jwork123nl

As posted here on the RME forum, I found out
that fader groups are not present when the UCX is used in stand-alone mode.

Can someone with an UFX see if that is the case also with a UFX?
Are you able to use fader groups in stand-alone mode? Am I doing something wrong here?

fader groups is a feature of Totalmix, not the fpga mixer. So no, you can't use fader groups in standalone mode. But you can set up the hi pass and low pass filters and save the setting.

[jwork123nl]

AHA, thanks a lot for this info!
I could not deduce from the manual, which just says the comlete mixer state is stored.
Wonder how you get such information?
Still very happy with the UCX of course, perhaps I will do a feature request for this.

[Mats H]

Originally Posted by jwork123nl

AHA, thanks a lot for this info!
I could not deduce from the manual, which just says the comlete mixer state is stored.
Wonder how you get such information?
Still very happy with the UCX of course, perhaps I will do a feature request for this.

Through the RME forum and thanks to the fact that I've used the UFX extensively for one and a half year

[msmales555]

I've been using the UFX for about three weeks now and it's everything the FF800 was and more. I'm loving it.

Now I just need to sell my FF800... It's a shame I can't connect it to my UFX and use its preamps as well.

EDIT: Actually, it turns out that you can use the ADAT out from the FF800 to go into the ADAT in on the UFX. Does anyone have experience using the two together? I honestly might not sell the FF800 if I can still use it with the UFX.

[MichaelPatrick]

Originally Posted by msmales555

I've been using the UFX for about three weeks now and it's everything the FF800 was and more. I'm loving it.

Now I just need to sell my FF800... It's a shame I can't connect it to my UFX and use its preamps as well.

EDIT: Actually, it turns out that you can use the ADAT out from the FF800 to go into the ADAT in on the UFX. Does anyone have experience using the two together? I honestly might not sell the FF800 if I can still use it with the UFX.

I've used ADAT in from a Lynx Aurora and recently bought a Focusrite Octopre MkII Dynamic. Both work well. I sold the Auroras because the UFX AD is as good or better. You should have no problem with a FF800.

[apples_oranges]

can someone help out, I bought one of these a few weeks ago and I'm sure I had this working at one stage, just trying to get playback of channels recorded in stand alone durec mode. I can hear the channels fine while being recorded but I can't play a thing back.

Here's what I've done.

Put headphone volume to -5.0db
Put mic pre channel 9 gain to 55db
Unmute channel 9
Set channel 9 record to ON
Set channel 9 play channel to 9
Set phones out 9/10 mix of channel 9 volume to 0.0db
Go to Record/Playback mode, record track.
Press stop, go to beginning of track, press Play, no sound.

I know it's recording because I can take the tracks to the comp and listen to them.

[Mats H]

Originally Posted by apples_oranges

Set channel 9 play channel to 9

Hi! You're 99 percent there, but I think you're approaching it kind of the wrong way. The files are not channel tagged, so what you're basically telling Totalmix is to play back channel 9 if your wave file. If the file is monophonic, you'll hear nothing.

You'll want to choose channel 9 play channel 1 if file is in mono. I hope it works out for you

[apples_oranges]

Originally Posted by Mats H

Hi! You're 99 percent there, but I think you're approaching it kind of the wrong way. The files are not channel tagged, so what you're basically telling Totalmix is to play back channel 9 if your wave file. If the file is monophonic, you'll hear nothing.

You'll want to choose channel 9 play channel 1 if file is in mono. I hope it works out for you

Brilliant works perfectly. I guess I'm not really getting the concept of the play channels, say I was recording mic pre channels 9,10,11,12 simultaneously would I set them to play channels 1,2,3,4 respectively or all channel 1 or something else?

[Mats H]

Originally Posted by apples_oranges

Brilliant works perfectly. I guess I'm not really getting the concept of the play channels, say I was recording mic pre channels 9,10,11,12 simultaneously would I set them to play channels 1,2,3,4 respectively or all channel 1 or something else?

yeah exactly! Choose playback channel 1,2,3,4 respectively for that.

The brilliant thing about this concept is that you can route playback channel 1 to ADAT4 and do a completely different mix with compression and EQ and then submix it to an output for radio. And one mix on say ADAT 12 routed to ADAT7-8 could go untouched for a separate recorder or perhaps a monitor system that would benefit from a different EQ or gate setting.

So you can "reuse" your playback channels on all inputs if you like.

[tothemoon]

Originally Posted by Mats H

Through the RME forum and thanks to the fact that I've used the UFX extensively for one and a half year

Hello Mats,

I have been fallowing this RME UFX thread since it first came out and I've seen many of your post. I do appreciate all the time you, and many others here, take to answer questions and give opinions. I don't know if this is something you have mentioned in the past or not, but I was wondering if you have ever compared the RME UFX to the Apogee Symphony I/O. I finally saved enough to upgrade from my Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 and I'm trying to make a decision. If I get the Apogee, it will be the new Symphony with a 2x6 card (about $2000). I know the RME offers a lot more I/O. I was wondering strictly about the AD/DA conversion difference between these two units. I pointed this question to you because I can how familiar you with the UFX, but of course if anyone out there has an answer will be most appreciated

Thanks for your time

[Mats H]

Originally Posted by tothemoon

Hello Mats,

I have been fallowing this RME UFX thread since it first came out and I've seen many of your post. I do appreciate all the time you, and many others here, take to answer questions and give opinions. I don't know if this is something you have mentioned in the past or not, but I was wondering if you have ever compared the RME UFX to the Apogee Symphony I/O. I finally saved enough to upgrade from my Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 and I'm trying to make a decision. If I get the Apogee, it will be the new Symphony with a 2x6 card (about $2000). I know the RME offers a lot more I/O. I was wondering strictly about the AD/DA conversion difference between these two units. I pointed this question to you because I can how familiar you with the UFX, but of course if anyone out there has an answer will be most appreciated

Thanks for your time

Hi! I'm sorry to tell you that I've yet to hear the Symphony, but it's on a short list of devices that would compliment the UFX for more I/O. Right now I use a Lavry Blue 8 ch A/D and an Audient ASP008 when I need more tracks. That gives me 20 mic and 8 line inputs. The AES is used for external FX processing. It's somewhat of a clunky setup with 7 rack units and it'd be great to get all this down to maybe four RU.

Now for my use, which involves carrying the entire setup for live recording and FOH mix a couple of times a month, it's heavy but I can manage. The UFX is used for mixing, DUREC backup recording and routing, besides the obvious audio interface for recording. For all the features and my requirements at the moment, I don't think any other interface would fit. The routing, internal FX and so fourth are phenomenal.

I have no doubt that the Symphony has better converters the UFX and I do prefer my Lavry to the RME in a controlled environment. However the converters will not make the biggest difference in a live situation, I hear very slight differences, depending on the source material. Besides, the UFX has lower latency conversion so I actually prefer it to the Lavry for some channels.

If you're recording in a studio and can do with basic routing and only record two tracks at a time, then the Symphony might definitely be a better choice. For quite some time, I used a two channel Lake People F44, which outperformed my old Fireface 800 in A/D, even though it only did 48 KHz. So it basically comes down to needs. What do you NEED today and what are they in a year or two? IMO two inputs won't get you very far and an upgrade from that when going the Symphony route is another $2000. Just offering food for thought...

Good luck with your purchase!

[tothemoon]

Originally Posted by Mats H

Hi! I'm sorry to tell you that I've yet to hear the Symphony, but it's on a short list of devices that would compliment the UFX for more I/O. Right now I use a Lavry Blue 8 ch A/D and an Audient ASP008 when I need more tracks. That gives me 20 mic and 8 line inputs. The AES is used for external FX processing. It's somewhat of a clunky setup with 7 rack units and it'd be great to get all this down to maybe four RU.

Now for my use, which involves carrying the entire setup for live recording and FOH mix a couple of times a month, it's heavy but I can manage. The UFX is used for mixing, DUREC backup recording and routing, besides the obvious audio interface for recording. For all the features and my requirements at the moment, I don't think any other interface would fit. The routing, internal FX and so fourth are phenomenal.

I have no doubt that the Symphony has better converters the UFX and I do prefer my Lavry to the RME in a controlled environment. However the converters will not make the biggest difference in a live situation, I hear very slight differences, depending on the source material. Besides, the UFX has lower latency conversion so I actually prefer it to the Lavry for some channels.

If you're recording in a studio and can do with basic routing and only record two tracks at a time, then the Symphony might definitely be a better choice. For quite some time, I used a two channel Lake People F44, which outperformed my old Fireface 800 in A/D, even though it only did 48 KHz. So it basically comes down to needs. What do you NEED today and what are they in a year or two? IMO two inputs won't get you very far and an upgrade from that when going the Symphony route is another $2000. Just offering food for thought...

Good luck with your purchase!

Thanks for you feedback Mats, much appreciated. I don't have a big studio and I will be working with solo artist for the most part. Although I am going to record my friends band soon. Anyway, I ended up going for the Symphony with the 2x6 card, just ordered. It has 8x8 adat connection, so I can still run some extra channels there to record drums. It was a tough call, but my priority was to have 2 good AD channels for tracking and good DA for mixing and re-amping. And the end of the day I know I could have been happy with either one (UFX or Symphony). I'm still a big fan of the UFX, I'm sure I'll be coming back to this thread just to see what's going on. I wish I could have both. One day. I just want to say that you have been very helpful to educate a lot of us here about the UFX. Thanks again.

[Mats H]

Originally Posted by tothemoon

I just want to say that you have been very helpful to educate a lot of us here about the UFX. Thanks again.

Np, anytime. Good luck with your new interface!