RME Fireface UFX

[mig27]

There must be some switching options.
Maybe some of the early adopters can chime in?

[HomeProducer]

I dream of a perfect interface. A combination of an audiointerface with a monitor controller for at least 3 speaker pairs and separate volume controls for speakers and phones. And no DIGITAL volume control, but analog. A mono button, a L?R flip button, is that all so diffucult that I have to wait for it for 20 years?

[wakestyle]

Originally Posted by HomeProducer

did I see it right?
It has only ONE Volume control for headphones AND monitors?
or you can switch? If so, is it a digital control or analog control?

You can control just about anything from the front panel (it's standalone capable). Including switching between 3 set's of monitor out's. So ya, you can designate a main mix out and a headphone out and switch between if you like.

[chaeridley]

You push the volume knob in and it switches output.

[Audio Hombre]

Originally Posted by Animus

Except, the RME will actually have drivers that work.

+1 NO KIDDING! rme is and has always been rock solid thumbsup

[Reborn]

Did RME have a working unit at AES? It seems like someone would have checked he UFX out there. We all can see it's a amazing piece of tech especially at the price point. What we all want to know is how does it sound? Based on the Specs if accurate I expect it will be quiet with excellent channel seperation. This could translate to a Deep Wide soundstage!


That still doesn't tell me how the headphone outputs sound. Come on somebody spill it already!

[JP__]

Here are some excerpts from the German Professional Audio magazine (translated with google):
"Note the echo sound as such, which offers the same transparent and airy sound characteristics as the injected signal. Overall, our sounds, however, sharp and biting. We soon a treble controls are missing for lowering the high frequency components. The Hall processor leaves the test also a somewhat mixed impression.

Although a number of opulent place of adjustable parameters and four-room, two Hall-and a gated reverb algorithm, a wide range of space simulations. The space algorithms satisfy the test give very good sound, the signals applied to a good deal of pleasant-sounding space and shine. In sharp contrast, it sounds in the Hall algorithms, however, topfig artificial and unpleasant. The integrated height control can not help it to provide. Moreover, in places, a fluttering of the tinny reverb is heard. For recordings in which musicians are to be supplied with effects in the headphones, but it is enough anyway. It is a pity, however, that have to share a send reverb and echo path and limit the possibilities. In this area there is therefore plenty of room for future software updates. Completely different is the other hand, the sound quality is the channel strip effects, can convince no ifs and buts.
But it also masters careful equalization of UFX equalizer with flying colors. A highlight is the dynamic effects that have, despite their transparent base sound sound designer qualities and also strong pack to cut it herauszumodellieren to transients clearly to emphasize the decay of instruments or rigorously with the help of the expander as a noise gate. The effect is activated in addition, auto level while in operation a little getting used to. But once understood, the signals can be like a brick wall limiter to increase the loudness.

The test in the professional audio measurement laboratory UFX graduated with flying colors. No matter what input we can measure the FFT spectrum shows a noise floor below -100 decibels excellent. The microphone amplifiers deliver exceptional 73.9 dB gain even more reserve about ten decibels than about the Fireface. This should get even the quietest microphones according to the application. The phantom power is measured 47.3 volts, almost picture-book basis. In terms of the voltages UFX is also in an excellent position. We determine values at the microphone, line and instrument inputs, which lie in measuring the distance between noise nearly 84-91 decibels. The results for the noise ratio are in a range from about 82 to 88 decibels.
Total harmonic distortion is also identified with the 0.005 percent at microphone or line input plus 0.02 percent at the instrument input excellent. The results after measuring the common mode rejection provide somewhat less value than the Fireface UC/400. When the line inputs, there is nothing to complain about. The measured curve shows a constant pattern in very good -65 decibels. The same measurement on the microphone inputs provide the relevant area, the same result. However, the curve rises to the bass to to -45 decibels. In return, the UFX shows in measuring the nonlinearity as a model student.
The curve is down almost -125 decibels completely linear, a fantastic value. "

[lllubi]

Originally Posted by JP__

Here are some excerpts from the German Professional Audio magazine (translated with google):
"Note the echo sound as such, which offers the same transparent and airy sound characteristics as the injected signal. Overall, our sounds, however, sharp and biting. We soon a treble controls are missing for lowering the high frequency components. The Hall processor leaves the test also a somewhat mixed impression.

Although a number of opulent place of adjustable parameters and four-room, two Hall-and a gated reverb algorithm, a wide range of space simulations. The space algorithms satisfy the test give very good sound, the signals applied to a good deal of pleasant-sounding space and shine. In sharp contrast, it sounds in the Hall algorithms, however, topfig artificial and unpleasant. The integrated height control can not help it to provide. Moreover, in places, a fluttering of the tinny reverb is heard. For recordings in which musicians are to be supplied with effects in the headphones, but it is enough anyway. It is a pity, however, that have to share a send reverb and echo path and limit the possibilities. In this area there is therefore plenty of room for future software updates. Completely different is the other hand, the sound quality is the channel strip effects, can convince no ifs and buts.
But it also masters careful equalization of UFX equalizer with flying colors. A highlight is the dynamic effects that have, despite their transparent base sound sound designer qualities and also strong pack to cut it herauszumodellieren to transients clearly to emphasize the decay of instruments or rigorously with the help of the expander as a noise gate. The effect is activated in addition, auto level while in operation a little getting used to. But once understood, the signals can be like a brick wall limiter to increase the loudness.

The test in the professional audio measurement laboratory UFX graduated with flying colors. No matter what input we can measure the FFT spectrum shows a noise floor below -100 decibels excellent. The microphone amplifiers deliver exceptional 73.9 dB gain even more reserve about ten decibels than about the Fireface. This should get even the quietest microphones according to the application. The phantom power is measured 47.3 volts, almost picture-book basis. In terms of the voltages UFX is also in an excellent position. We determine values at the microphone, line and instrument inputs, which lie in measuring the distance between noise nearly 84-91 decibels. The results for the noise ratio are in a range from about 82 to 88 decibels.
Total harmonic distortion is also identified with the 0.005 percent at microphone or line input plus 0.02 percent at the instrument input excellent. The results after measuring the common mode rejection provide somewhat less value than the Fireface UC/400. When the line inputs, there is nothing to complain about. The measured curve shows a constant pattern in very good -65 decibels. The same measurement on the microphone inputs provide the relevant area, the same result. However, the curve rises to the bass to to -45 decibels. In return, the UFX shows in measuring the nonlinearity as a model student.
The curve is down almost -125 decibels completely linear, a fantastic value. "

how does it compare to their reference converter preamp combo?

[didier.brest]

Originally Posted by lllubi

how does it compare to their reference converter preamp combo?

It is the Micstasy. I'm also interested in this question and whether the sound better than the one from the FF400.

[lllubi]

Originally Posted by didier.brest

It is the Micstasy. I'm also interested in this question and whether the sound better than the one from the FF400.

Professional audio mag compares new converters usually to Lynx Auroras
and preamps to Lake People F355s

remember a test where they said basically there was no winner between
the Lynx and RMEs QS

[JP__]

Ok, some more:
"In the listening test, we compare the UFX with our reference, the Lynx Aurora 8 converters plus pre-amp mic Lake People F355 and of course, representative of the predecessor, the Fireface 400 As expected, the UFX provides a crystal clear, transparent sound that is very finely resolves upwards by precise fine dynamics impressive and unsparingly honest accurately captures every detail. Based on the basic sound is Fireface 400 and UFX completely identical and indulge in a teutonischnüchternen objectivity.

Nevertheless, show minimal differences that are apparent only through intensive listening tests: The UFX-built microphone recording a track sound more dynamic, more airy and more plastic than the Fireface 400 The manufacturer has not promised too much in terms of the dual analog to digital conversion behind these inputs. This includes the UFX some way to our studio reference, although it's not quite enough for our test candidates to act as equals."

[surflounge]

Yes, and it was running a fresh version of Pro Tools 9.
Didn't have time to listen to it, but no problems or glitches I could see.

Originally Posted by Reborn

Did RME have a working unit at AES? It seems like someone would have checked he UFX out there. We all can see it's a amazing piece of tech especially at the price point. Come on somebody spill it already!

[Reborn]

Originally Posted by JP__

Ok, some more:
"In the listening test, we compare the UFX with our reference, the Lynx Aurora 8 converters plus pre-amp mic Lake People F355 and of course, representative of the predecessor, the Fireface 400 As expected, the UFX provides a crystal clear, transparent sound that is very finely resolves upwards by precise fine dynamics impressive and unsparingly honest accurately captures every detail. Based on the basic sound is Fireface 400 and UFX completely identical and indulge in a teutonischnüchternen objectivity.

Nevertheless, show minimal differences that are apparent only through intensive listening tests: The UFX-built microphone recording a track sound more dynamic, more airy and more plastic than the Fireface 400 The manufacturer has not promised too much in terms of the dual analog to digital conversion behind these inputs. This includes the UFX some way to our studio reference, although it's not quite enough for our test candidates to act as equals."

you have to help me with the translation. It sounds like they are saying that the Preamp recording from the UFX sounded plastic compared to a fireface 400. It also sounds like they are saying that the sonic performance was about equal to a fireface 400. This would be a deal breaker for me as I sold my Fireface 400 in favor of a Apogee Duet. Please tell me I do not understand the translation. Just what are they saying about the UFX compared to a Lynx?


Jazztone

[rumleymusic]

The UFX-built microphone recording a track sound more dynamic, more airy and more plastic

I think this is supposed to be a positive statement, though I am not sure what plastic sounds like.

The FF400 uses the same preamp chip at UFX, but that does not mean they are exactly the same design. Nor is the Orpheus, Duet, Lavry etc.

[Reborn]

Originally Posted by rumleymusic

I think this is supposed to be a positive statement, though I am not sure what plastic sounds like.

The FF400 uses the same preamp chip at UFX, but that does not mean they are exactly the same design. Nor is the Orpheus, Duet, Lavry etc.

More importantly, I am sure plenty of people are like me and plan to go Line in through there outboard pre amps. I have never heard a RME preamp I liked so I am not that worried about that. However the quality of capture and playback is far more important than how good the reverb tails are form totalmix EFX.

I am puzzled because I have read 3 reviews now and not one mention of recording through the unit. Just listening to the D/A circuit. I don't understand how you can test a Audio interface without recording multiple sources through it. After all isn't it's main purpose to digitize audio in the best possible(Transparent) way?

Where are the loopback test and Vocal guitar and horn recording test? Use a splitter and record a signal to the UFX and a reference box(Lynx) then compare the recordings from the same source. How hard can that be? Is that why I stopped reading Pro audio magazines?

Jazztone

[didier.brest]

Originally Posted by rumleymusic

The FF400 uses the same preamp chip at UFX, but that does not mean they are exactly the same design. Nor is the Orpheus, Duet, Lavry etc.

As far as the preamp is concerned there should not be significant differences since the chip is designed for being connected directly to the 3 lines of the mic cable (pins 25, 26, 27) and delivers a signal at a level suitable for entering in an AD converter, which is another story...

[Melvin J.]

I concur Reborn. I don't understand why we can't have some kind of decent audio loop back tests done ASAP or already. I am really considering this unit but without definitive tests, well...

[-JK-]

Originally Posted by rumleymusic

I think this is supposed to be a positive statement, though I am not sure what plastic sounds like.

That's a bad translation, it should be "three-dimensional" instead.

[Reborn]

Originally Posted by didier.brest

As far as the preamp is concerned there should not be significant differences since the chip is designed for being connected directly to the 3 lines of the mic cable (pins 25, 26, 27) and delivers a signal at a level suitable for entering in an AD converter, which is another story...

You would think but the TI chip sound nothing alike in the DUET/ENSEMBLE
Versus Micstacy/Fireface 400. I have never heard the Orpheus so I can't comment. I think the difference may be the power supply and grounding an d circuits after the Mic Pre chip. Perhaps someone who knows can speak on this.

[Reborn]

There is obviously huge deisre for this to be every bit as much of a hit product as it seems like it could be! Half as many views as the PT9 thread, speaks to the interest in the product. Afterall people have been waiting for pro tools native for years! I guess we will find out over time if this box lives up to it's potential!


P.S. Somebody record a rhythm section and vocals and post it already

[rumleymusic]

As far as the preamp is concerned there should not be significant differences since the chip is designed for being connected directly to the 3 lines of the mic cable (pins 25, 26, 27)

I'm not sure where you got this, but the PGA2500 still uses a typical mic input circuitry before the chip. Here is the recommended schematic from the data sheet.

[didier.brest]

It consists only in capacitors and resistors. Fully passive, no gain. I would not expect any sound difference from different realizations of such a circuit. I may be wrong.

[Reborn]

Originally Posted by didier.brest

It consists only in capacitors and resistors. Fully passive, no gain. I would not expect any sound difference from different realizations of such a circuit. I may be wrong.

Since in these cases you will never hear the mic pre without the following D/A circuit and possibly the A/D circuit unless there is a pre conversion insert. Perhaps the difference we are hearing is again the surrounding circuitry(A/D D/A)!

[didier.brest]

Much likely.
So, does Apogee sounds better than RME ?

There is a recent test here that makes clear to me that the AD converters from the Orpheus may be audibly better than the ones from the FF800.

[Reborn]

Originally Posted by didier.brest

Much likely.
So, does Apogee sounds better than RME ?


There is a recent test here that makes clear to me that the AD converters from the Orpheus may be audibly better than the ones from the FF800.

IMO Ensemble/Duet to Fireface 800/400 Yes
Micstacy ? Only hear it never used it

[rumleymusic]

The sound of all interfaces comes with the analog cicuitry, before and after the preamps and converters. Different components, even if passive, will lead to a different sound. It could be the difference of a capacitor that costs 79 cents rathern than 8 cents. You can be sure Prism doesn't skimp on anything.

MOTU 828mk3 also uses the PGA2500 chip, and those preamps are muddy and noisy as all getout.

[JP__]

Originally Posted by Reborn

you have to help me with the translation.

Haha, yes, plastic is a nice translation...

Originally Posted by -JK-

That's a bad translation, it should be "three-dimensional" instead.

Yes, something like that...

[climber]

couple of questions as I have a FF800...

1) TotalMix is rewritten & looks nice. is the Matrix the same?

2) has anyone compared the converters to the FF800 ones? is it worth an upgrade?

[Reborn]

Originally Posted by climber

couple of questions as I have a FF800...

1) TotalMix is rewritten & looks nice. is the Matrix the same?

2) has anyone compared the converters to the FF800 ones? is it worth an upgrade?

Those are some of the questions of the day that we are waiting to find out. Hopefully someone will chime in soon!

[Mats H]

Originally Posted by climber

couple of questions as I have a FF800...

1) TotalMix is rewritten & looks nice. is the Matrix the same?

2) has anyone compared the converters to the FF800 ones? is it worth an upgrade?

Still waiting for my UFX. I ordered it the same day it was announced...