The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Zoom UAC-2, any thoughts?
Old 21st July 2015
  #1
Zoom UAC-2, any thoughts?

Need a new Interface at home as my Roland UA-55 finally died. Just find out that Zoom released this new model with USB 3.0. I have no experience of Zoom?
Old 23rd July 2015
  #2
Gear Nut
 

Was wondering the same thing myself.. any possible benefit to latency/performance with usb 3.0 vs 2.0?
Old 25th July 2015
  #3
Well, I took the plunge! Got it yesterday and it works perfect! I tested it with 128 samples, buffersize with Cubase 8 Pro. Did a lot of audio tracks and a couple of VST instruments and it runs great!
Old 26th July 2015
  #4
Gear Maniac
 
CharlesEdward3rd's Avatar
 

what's the latency specs?
Old 27th July 2015
  #5
Lives for gear
I'm not surprised that you like it. I've been pretty impressed with my H4n for several years now and the G5 gets quite a bit of love from guitarists on the low end. Zoom stuff always seems to come out working noticeably better than it should at its price point.
Old 29th July 2015
  #6
Gear Nut
 

Good to know. The question remains, any possible benefit of usb 3.0 for performance.
Old 11th September 2015
  #7
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iconica View Post
Well, I took the plunge! Got it yesterday and it works perfect! I tested it with 128 samples, buffersize with Cubase 8 Pro. Did a lot of audio tracks and a couple of VST instruments and it runs great!
Can you bypass the mixing software? And control everything directly through your DAW?
Old 10th October 2015
  #8
Thanks to Tui, I decided to take a plunge and get it for the fun of it, and to satisfy my curiosity about the RTL with USB 3. For anyone who's interested, After getting it setup properly, my RTL from Oblique RTL Utility and Centrance tools is as follows: (at 48khz) 32 samples/2.67 msec, 64 samples/4 msec, 128 samples/6.67 msec, 256 samples/12 msec, 512 samples/22.67 msec. Sonically wise on playback, next to my Apogee Quartet, I can't really say I heard a significant difference. I've just had it for one day, so we'll see over time.
Old 7th November 2015
  #9
Gear Nut
 
assessor's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by daxmaestro View Post
Sonically wise on playback, next to my Apogee Quartet, I can't really say I heard a significant difference. I've just had it for one day, so we'll see over time.
4 weeks later.
What is your opinion regarding quality now?
Old 8th November 2015
  #10
Quote:
Originally Posted by assessor View Post
4 weeks later.
What is your opinion regarding quality now?
I no longer have either one. I've never recorded anything through the zoom's inputs, but on the da side of things, I can say it held its own against the quartet. Definitely in the mid-end range of gear.
Old 9th November 2015
  #11
Here for the gear
 

First thing's first; Hi Gearslutz forum members! This is my very first post on GS

Quote:
Originally Posted by daxmaestro View Post
I no longer have either one. I've never recorded anything through the zoom's inputs, but on the da side of things, I can say it held its own against the quartet. Definitely in the mid-end range of gear.
It's unfortunate that you no longer have the UAC-2, I just bought one myself a few days ago (partially because of your comments -and Tui's- regarding its low latency capabilities) and I would have liked to ask you a few questions regarding your UAC-2 performance compared to mine, and that could have involved doing some simple tests on your UAC-2, but this won't be possible anymore since you no longer have yours.

In any case, I want to thank you for sharing your experience with the UAC-2 Overall I'm satisfied with its performance, even though I was not able to achieve the same low RTL that you did. My RTL results (as measured by Oblique, Centrance) are a bit higher than yours, probably because of our computers USB 3 chipset differences (Intel USB 3 chipset in your case, vs the Renesa USB 3 chipset in my case). BTW, Zoom really puts an emphasis in using the Intel USB 3 chipset over other USB3 chipsets, and they do not guarantee compatibility with other chipsets, but it seems that my notebook's Renesa chipset also works fine.

My RTL results are as follow (tested in Reaper 5.1pre3, i7 notebook's USB3 port*, windows 7 64bit):

At 48Khz sampling rate: 24 samples/3.3 ms, 32 samples/3.6 ms, 64 samples/4.9 ms, 128 samples/7.6ms

At 96Khz sampling rate: 24 samples/NA, 32 samples/2.1 ms, 64 samples/2.8 ms, 128 samples/4.1ms

FWIW, even at 48Khz/24 samples buffer, I could play a small project with a few VSTs without obvious "clicks and pops". The combination of sampling rate and buffer that gave me the smallest RTL while still being able to play 3 instances of Pianoteq 5 (a piano VST that can be quite demanding) + 2 live vocal tracks with multifx on each, all without any hiccups whatsoever, was at 96Khz/64 samples/2.8ms...Nice! Of course, if you have a high track count project, you'll need to raise the buffers to 128 or 256 but for small projects, this UAC-2 is FAST!

* Note that when I tested my UAC-2 with a USB2 port instead of a USB3, the RTL increased slightly at certain sample rates. For example: 96k/32 samples -->2.1ms(USB3) vs 2.4ms(USB2). So it seems that using USB3 is making a real difference. And using a USB3 intel chipset, an even bigger difference (based on your tests results vs mine).

From what I've been reading about USB3 vs USB2 implementation (point-to-point links in USB3 vs multiplexing/polling in USB2) , in theory USB3 can achieve not only much higher speed transfer/throughput (~x10) but also much lower latencies (~ 50usec) vs USB2's minimum "streaming buffer" of 1ms, which would explain why the UAC-2 is capable of such low latencies. Just for fun, I tested how low the UAC-2 could go and at [email protected] I got 1.1ms RTL! Granted, it was unusable (heavy clicks and pops) but in theory this would be impossible to achieve with USB2 (USB2 has a minimum processing time of 2ms (1ms send/1ms receive)

So if this is all true (I need to analyze this further) it means that IF audio-card manufacturers implemented their USB3 interfaces properly, they could achieve much better round-trip latencies than current USB2 interfaces (i.e. RTL similar to their PCIexpress/ThunderBolt card) We will see...Interesting times ahead

BTW daxmaestro, is there any special reason you got rid of your UAC-2?

Chuck
Old 9th November 2015
  #12
Quote:
Originally Posted by chucky5p View Post

BTW daxmaestro, is there any special reason you got rid of your UAC-2?

Chuck
Hey. On windows, it only playback audio @ 44.1khz. I usually record at 48khz, so if I'm working in pro tools, and want to play any music on the computer, it's a no go. I had to exit pro tools, then switch to the 44.1 to play music. I did contact zoom who said this was a limitation. Sucks, because between the very low latency and the sound, I grew quite fond of the little guy.

One thing to note, just because a device is USB 3, doesn't mean its going to have low latency - a lesson I learned with the new Presonus Studio 192. The latency was pretty high - at least on my Intel USB 3 ports and other systems I tried it on. Presonus says my USB 3 drivers are out of date, which is weird, because I had a completely different experience with the zoom.
Old 25th November 2015
  #13
Here for the gear
 

Guys, I've been thinking about buying the UAC-2 for use in Bootcamp (Win7) with Kontakt, VE Pro, Forte, etc. Anybody tried this? I'm wondering if it's stable for live stuff...

Thanks!
Old 28th November 2015
  #14
Quote:
Originally Posted by mverta View Post
Guys, I've been thinking about buying the UAC-2 for use in Bootcamp (Win7) with Kontakt, VE Pro, Forte, etc. Anybody tried this? I'm wondering if it's stable for live stuff...

Thanks!
I did some heavy work in pro tools with kontakt, sample tank, and other vi's with little to no problems.
Old 28th December 2015
  #15
Here for the gear
 

A word of warning. You can't use this with 64 bit Windows (only 32 bit Windows & Mac) as Zoom inexplicabably do not provide a digitally signed driver (why provide a 64 bit driver at all?). This renders it useless for me and I expect a large chunk of its potential audience. The 32 bit driver is designed to work exclusively on 32 bit Windows, so that's a no-go too.

Oh, and it can't recognise USB 3.0 ports either, or at least neither ones connected to Intel nor Renesas controllers on the mobo (w/ 32 bit Windows) that I tried it on ... it reports to you that it can operate faster when plugged into a USB 3.0 (SuperSpeed) port, and it's at higher latency than it would and should be on a USB 3.0 port.

Maybe if they fix the drivers and USB 3.0 selling point it might be more than a paperweight.

I'm assuming earlier drivers / USB 3.0 functionality did work, but they don't have the v1.0 drivers online. Only newer v1.1 ... it doesn't say much for Zoom that they clearly did zero Q&A on the new drivers.
Old 29th December 2015
  #16
Here for the gear
 

2.2 ms at 96k 32 samples. I recorded a couple of tracks with no problem in Sonar pro. USB 3.0 answer to Mac thunderbolt. USB 2.0 interfaces all suck.
Old 30th December 2015
  #17
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Byrnicus View Post
2.2 ms at 96k 32 samples. I recorded a couple of tracks with no problem in Sonar pro. USB 3.0 answer to Mac thunderbolt. USB 2.0 interfaces all suck.
If you're using it on 64 bit Windows and have the old driver files, can you upload them somewhere?
Old 30th December 2015
  #18
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rubberducks View Post
A word of warning. You can't use this with 64 bit Windows (only 32 bit Windows & Mac) as Zoom inexplicabably do not provide a digitally signed driver (why provide a 64 bit driver at all?). This renders it useless for me and I expect a large chunk of its potential audience. The 32 bit driver is designed to work exclusively on 32 bit Windows, so that's a no-go too.
I see the 64bit driver available for download on their site. Have you tried it?
https://www.zoom.co.jp/sites/default...n64_v1.1.0.zip
Old 30th December 2015
  #19
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by veemee View Post
I see the 64bit driver available for download on their site. Have you tried it?
https://www.zoom.co.jp/sites/default...n64_v1.1.0.zip
Per my post, it doesn't work. It isn't digitally signed. 64bit Windows won't run unsigned drivers.

I assume there was a v1.0 that used to be available ... or the thing hasn't worked since release with 64 bit Windows.
Old 30th December 2015
  #20
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubberducks View Post
Per my post, it doesn't work. It isn't digitally signed. 64bit Windows won't run unsigned drivers.

I assume there was a v1.0 that used to be available ... or the thing hasn't worked since release with 64 bit Windows.
This is strange. I have 64 bit Windows 10, and it worked ok when I had it.
Old 30th December 2015
  #21
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by daxmaestro View Post
This is strange. I have 64 bit Windows 10, and it worked ok when I had it.
I'm pretty sure the driver version used to be V1.0 ... unfortunately I didn't download them (that was about 6 weeks ago) when looking at it then.
Old 31st December 2015
  #22
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubberducks View Post
I'm pretty sure the driver version used to be V1.0 ... unfortunately I didn't download them (that was about 6 weeks ago) when looking at it then.
Ohh. Didn't realize that. Weird that an update would take it away. Have you contacted them? It worked on my usb 3 ports on my Asus laptop.
Old 3rd January 2016
  #23
Lives for gear
 
djwaxxy's Avatar
ive been looking at this interface too its on offer at the moment and im looking for something which will offer higher quality/more track counts/lower latency and was wondering how many channels were you able to use and at what latency..im currently using a konnekt 6 firewire and I can usually getaround 15 audio tracks,6 vst instruments,3 group fx all going with a 17ms latency and 48khz ...but that not using kontakt 5 if I use kontakt 5 you can half that.
Old 5th January 2016
  #24
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by daxmaestro View Post
Ohh. Didn't realize that. Weird that an update would take it away. Have you contacted them? It worked on my usb 3 ports on my Asus laptop.
They replied after Xmas / NY break.

Gave me a link to the V1.0 64 bit Windows driver. It works, unlike the V1.1

I strongly suggest that anyone who has this interface does not touch V1.1 64 bit.

Link they gave me for V1.0 64 bit Windows is here, for anyone who had the same problem as me. I requested that they either take down or fix the 64 bit drivers, hopefully they will.

https://copy.com/4onGy8b4NsR2Rvi2

Still recognises USB3 ports as USB2, though.

Now that I have it working, I have to say, the headphone amp / output is really crap ... not that I was expecting anything great. Its job on the mic seems decent .. but I won't get the low latency until it recognises USB3.0 ports.

Their MixFx software could do with better documentation, and the dials in it are really unresponsive / twitchy.
Old 6th January 2016
  #25
I've had mine for about a week, and love it.

No problems at all. Knock on wood.
Old 6th January 2016
  #26
Lives for gear
 
djwaxxy's Avatar
ive just bought one are you using win 10 64bit?hows it sounding and is the mixefx console ok?thanks
Old 6th January 2016
  #27
Win10 64 bit here. Works flawlessly. I haven't tried the mixFX yet. But the latency and sound are amazing.

Preamps sound good enough for rock and roll, and I love the minimal but powerful setup.

Headphone amp could be louder, but that is good for me. Because I have a tendency to monitor too loud anyways lol.
Old 1st February 2016
  #28
Here for the gear
 

One says it's comparable to a quartet, another says it sounds crap on the DAC side... Are you sure that it's not just quieter than what you're used to?
Old 1st February 2016
  #29
Gear Nut
 
I-Quality's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by rubberducks View Post
Still recognises USB3 ports as USB2, though.
How do you check that? I just got the uac8 and updated to 1.1 driver and latest firmware, but latency is not on par with other user reports, at least not really usable at low buffer when using some vsts

btw im on win10 64 bits
Old 1st February 2016
  #30
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rubberducks View Post
A word of warning. You can't use this with 64 bit Windows (only 32 bit Windows & Mac) as Zoom inexplicabably do not provide a digitally signed driver (why provide a 64 bit driver at all?).
No problem at all running these under current generation USB3 implimentations with W10 64bit over here.

What motherboard have you got? Older ones with none Intel implimentations can be a bit trickier.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 4472 views: 1164389
Avatar for onceagain
onceagain 6 hours ago
replies: 410 views: 105156
Avatar for chinesewhiteman
chinesewhiteman 8th August 2019
replies: 791 views: 158989
Avatar for Nigel
Nigel 11th July 2020
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
🎙️ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump