The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
I thought I finally decided, but Presonus got in my way
Old 21st April 2017 | Show parent
  #61
TZk
Gear Addict
 

Hey JT,
Is the presonus studio 26 core audio for mac?

thanx

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtstudios View Post
Full disclosure, although I still work in my studio (jtstudios.net) I also recently started working for PreSonus.

I have heard the Studio 2|6 and Studio 6|8 interfaces and compared them to the Focusrite Scarlett range and to other PreSonus interfaces with similar features and price points. We tracked vocals, acoustic guitar, electric guitar running low latency amp modeling, and even drums on the 6|8 (Beta52, SM57, Earthworks Omni Pair).

All I can say is, take a listen before you make a judgement. Based on listening tests, we are very comfortable with the comparisons with our most obvious competitors in this space.

These products are NOT derivative of the Studio 192 series. These are simpler interfaces that don't rely on lots of DSP for Fat Channel processing. Latencies are low. The interfaces also come with Studio One 3 Artist (unlimited tracks), and a recently announced bundle of plugins from Arturia, Lexicon, Eventide, SPL, Maag, and Brainworx. Actually, all PreSonus interfaces and mixers come with this bundle now.

Studio 2|6 and 6|8 are very easy to use. They come with high gain preamps, 114 dB conversion, loud headphone amps, and high visibility stepped LED metering.

Take a listen. Your ears will tell you what you need to know.

JT
jtstudios.net
presonus.com
Old 21st April 2017
  #62
That is no doubt that the Presonus will sound better than the Scarletts. After all, I'm replacing a Scarlett. My main concern was (maybe still is) if the preamps are better in the Audient. The 4 inputs and 2 output section of the 6|8 really makes it hard for me.
Old 23rd April 2017 | Show parent
  #63
Here for the gear
 
jtstudios's Avatar
Yes, the Studio 2|6 runs with Core Audio Drivers on Mac.
Old 9th May 2017
  #64
Gonna bump it a bit. Anyone got their hands on a 6|8 ?
Old 9th May 2017 | Show parent
  #65
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieNine View Post
My main concern was (maybe still is) if the preamps are better in the Audient.
Not a matter of "if". The Audient Preamps are better than PreSonus Xmax and I haven't heard of PreSonus using anything else in upcoming products. In fact, barring external preamps the Audient Preamps are the best I've heard in any included interface bar none.
Old 10th May 2017 | Show parent
  #66
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alndln View Post
Not a matter of "if". The Audient Preamps are better than PreSonus Xmax and I haven't heard of PreSonus using anything else in upcoming products. In fact, barring external preamps the Audient Preamps are the best I've heard in any included interface bar none.
I am afraid our friend Ronnie will need an other 65 posts (sorry but i couldn't help counting them) to undestand that Presonus and Focusrite do not play in the same league as Audient !!!!
Old 10th May 2017 | Show parent
  #67
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirka View Post
I am afraid our friend Ronnie will need an other 65 posts (sorry but i couldn't help counting them) to undestand that Presonus and Focusrite do not play in the same league as Audient !!!!
Well I'm afraid that Ronnie did understand. I bumped the post to see if anyone got their hand on a 6/8, maybe it's a nice piece of gear. Do you know how old the ID14 is?


Meanwhile, I'm saving up for the Audient. Almost there, but a new bass cabinet got in my way.
Old 10th May 2017
  #68
Lives for gear
Honestly, 1) When I was researching for my interface upgrade a few years back, I looked at the Presonus units available at the time and everything (both the firewire and USB options) were underperformers from a driver standpoint. Using them required high buffer settings, round trip latency was bad meaning direct monitoring performance wasn't good, etc. This was the general user feedback, so I said no thanks. Apparently the issue is their drivers are based on a standard DICE (???) coding that sounds like it's a boiler plate solution for interface companies that don't make sure own drivers. No thank you.. give me a dedicated solution, not something slapped together and placed in a shiny box.
2) I had very minimal experience with a VSL for a friend (cheap way to get him recording) and it was a PITA to setup on his laptop. That didn't improve my lack of interest.
3) I don't believe marketing hype. It's almost always fluff in this industry. So the more you market XMAX preamps, the more turned off I am. The good preamps usually don't have a special name. Presonus has Xmax. Behringer has Midas. Turn off. To me, it screams "hey, we found a way we can seriously cut costs but yield similar quality in a creative method of delivering the signal to you". I don't want that. That's great if you're on a very tight budget... but not the way to go when you want your quality uncompromised.
4) I read the 192 has similar performance limitations that the older interfaces had.

Although I've never owned either... I've read so so many reviews about the two that if I were in the market and choosing between the two, I wouldn't seriously consider the Presonus interface product line. I would only consider it if it's purely a price play. If I want good performance, I'm going elsewhere. If I'm okay with compromising performance for something that still sounds pretty good, then I'd consider for that reason as well. But... I'm not okay with that. I would look Audient, RME, etc. I can vouch for a used Echo Audiofire if it has the features you need.
Old 12th May 2017 | Show parent
  #69
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPhoenix View Post
Honestly, 1) When I was researching for my interface upgrade a few years back, I looked at the Presonus units available at the time and everything (both the firewire and USB options) were underperformers from a driver standpoint. Using them required high buffer settings, round trip latency was bad meaning direct monitoring performance wasn't good, etc. This was the general user feedback, so I said no thanks. Apparently the issue is their drivers are based on a standard DICE (???) coding that sounds like it's a boiler plate solution for interface companies that don't make sure own drivers. No thank you.. give me a dedicated solution, not something slapped together and placed in a shiny box.
2) I had very minimal experience with a VSL for a friend (cheap way to get him recording) and it was a PITA to setup on his laptop. That didn't improve my lack of interest.
3) I don't believe marketing hype. It's almost always fluff in this industry. So the more you market XMAX preamps, the more turned off I am. The good preamps usually don't have a special name. Presonus has Xmax. Behringer has Midas. Turn off. To me, it screams "hey, we found a way we can seriously cut costs but yield similar quality in a creative method of delivering the signal to you". I don't want that. That's great if you're on a very tight budget... but not the way to go when you want your quality uncompromised.
4) I read the 192 has similar performance limitations that the older interfaces had.

Although I've never owned either... I've read so so many reviews about the two that if I were in the market and choosing between the two, I wouldn't seriously consider the Presonus interface product line. I would only consider it if it's purely a price play. If I want good performance, I'm going elsewhere. If I'm okay with compromising performance for something that still sounds pretty good, then I'd consider for that reason as well. But... I'm not okay with that. I would look Audient, RME, etc. I can vouch for a used Echo Audiofire if it has the features you need.
That shall put an end to my quest of finding the best budget interface for the features that I need.

Sadly, I never heard of Echo Audiofire and can't find them around here.
Old 12th May 2017 | Show parent
  #70
TZk
Gear Addict
 

Why this Studio 26 is perfect for me on paper for my live use.
* small
* 4 balanced normal jack outputs
* BIG normal MIDI sockets
* no drivers - core audio
* no external power

I don't see the point why R&D didn't provide 4 identical outputs?
1 pair has 113db and the main pair has 108db dynamic range.
And 118db like the studiolive 16.0.2 was impossible to do?
Old 14th May 2017
  #71
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieNine View Post
Hey everyone.

Not too long ago I finally made my decision to buy a Audient ID14.
Today (yes, only today) I noticed that Presonus is releasing two new interfaces, the Studio 68 and the smaller Studio 26.

Now, The Audient has the typical Audient preamps in it, Burr Brown DAC, it has two hybrid inputs, and a JFET D.I. If it'd only consist of these features, I wouldn't consider it, but it has an ADAT input, which is the main reason I decided on this interface.

On the other hand, Presonus' new Studio 68 has !4! hybrid inputs, XMAX preamps, and all this glitter and shine.

Could anyone help me decide? There's no way I'd use all of the 10 inputs with the Audient, but I thought it's a nice feature if I'd ever need it in the future.
I'm curious about the XMAX vs Audient preamps. Really really curious. Some say that you won't notice a difference until you hit RME level, but I have a Scarlet Solo at the moment.. that'd explain a lot I guess.

Thank you in advance,
Ronnie
I don't think RME preamps will be better than the Audient. Here is my take on preamps. As long as you are not in the bottom rung like Focusrite Scarlett preamps - which are still quite ok for many purposes - in the right hands, every preamp has its own minor tonal perspective - in some cases - very little, like the RME's which is also a perspective - clean.

In tests of preamps, while they do aid in the creative process, with options to flavor the audio, depending on what you choose to use, the most important aspect of a preamp is its primary purpose amplification, so the primary decision should be based on :

1. What is my source?

2. How much amplification/gain do I need.

3. At the desired level of amplification/gain, how clean do I need the preamp to be. i.e. some preamps add more or less noise/distortion, in comparison to others, especially at high gain levels.

4. How linear is the preamp gain dial - this is more of a workflow item, as it may affect how easily you can dial in the right gain level. But with almost infinite amplification in the digital tools, you have a greater margin to play around with, and still have perfectly usable audio recordings. Put it this way, in the days of analog mixers, every gain stage pre-recording, and post recording, added noise, so it was important to reduce the total noise as much as possible with the least noisy preamps(ideally) - to avoid adding noise post recording, from any further amplification stages. In digital, you no longer have this secondary consideration to you can be a bit less constrained in your gain settings - as digital amplification, post recording, adds absolutely no further noise.

As long as you pick preamps that meet the criteria above, almost any preamp on your shortlist will be good enough.

Post recording, any variances in the tone(frequency), are very likely to be compensated by the mixing engineer's decisions, as they react to the audio provided, to achieve the final result.

I do not expect any variances of significance, between the Presonus XMAX, Audient and the RME preamps and recent converters on interfaces released in the most recent 2 years. The recordings will be in the same ballpark.

Microphone choice and positioning will have far more of an effect on the recording that the choice of a modern recording device.

Nevertheless there is one area in which being nit picky some preamps are subjectively different(it could be measured but usually no one quotes this measure in the marketing blurb) - a factor known as the slew rate - how quickly the amp responds to changes in volume of the incoming signal. Preamps with higher slew rates, sound more accurate - especially on close-miked, or percussive sources. Preamps with a slower slew rate, sound a bit dull in comparison. I must add here - you need really good monitoring or lots of listening experience to discern the difference.

One is not better than the other - only a creative choice, which may also be compensated by the mixing engineer.

Like cooking, during mixing, you adjust the recipe and cooking method/tools, to the ingredients available, to arrive at a dish that tastes good enough, and does the same job - kill hunger tastefully. Unless you are cooking for a Michelin star chef, any minor variations in the outcome due to the slight difference in the ingredients, will not be of any significance to 99.9999999% of the listening/consuming public.

I suspect that the preamps in the Yamaha UR series, are of the slow slew variety, based on the audio examples I have heard - not bad only very slightly different.

Slower slew is almost like having a micro-micro-micro compressor, even out the recording level, which could be a good creative preference.

In conclusion, choose any recent interface with a decent preamp, and get on with the real work, creating a masterpiece. Modern gear will not usually get in your way, for the level of outcome you intend.

Other things to really consider are monitoring. During recording, will you monitor with plugins(e.g reverb), or with DSP accelerated plugins in your interface, the earlier has a bit more latency than the former?

Here again, most modern recent interfaces, should be good enough, in their RTL(round Trip Latency - typically anything with a total RTL of about 10 milliseconds or less is definitely good enough - but you will need to check to confirm).

Usually RME has the lowest stable RTL's. on USB attached audio interfaces.
Old 14th May 2017 | Show parent
  #72
Take these valued opinions into consideration. The latency of the ID22 should be similar to the ID14.

Quote:
Originally Posted by msmucr View Post
I see, but you have to decide about your priorities. You can balance as you want, but there can be only single winner. I don't want to persuade you..

There are certainly several aspects of the interface selection, you've asked for the latency. In that case, Babyface simply performs better than most of other USB interfaces incl. iD22. And it's proven choice with very stable drivers at both Windows and OS X.

If you prefer to have nice preamps with analog inserts, larger desktop format and more analog outputs and willing to sacrifice some latency performance, then go for iD22.

Of course, if you bump up your budget, then you can have more expensive interface with more I/Os and better latency than iD22. But it's always matter of some perspective.

Both Babyface and iD22 was tested many times using real loopback and many people use those interfaces, so it isn't unknown.
Both are listed at great Dawbench test by Vin
DAW Bench : DAW Performance Benchmarking
So find its corresponding sections..

Just to explain more about the discussed latency performance..
It can't be taken just as one one lower is better figure in milliseconds, because it is also important, how particular interface is efficient at given buffer size.
That practically means, how much processing headroom will be available for your virtual instruments and plugins.
Sometimes, this makes quite a big difference among various interfaces. And it's also reflected at Dawbench linked above (there are RXC, CV, NCV columns, where are counts of plugins and virtual instruments, you're able to use without pops and clicks at given buffer lenght).
So say you might have some interface, which reaches fantastic latency at 32 sample long buffer, but it's not very efficient, so it isn't usable, because as soon as you add couple of effects to your project, you'll hear just a click fest.
On the other hand, you might have some better interface, which has for 1st better latency in overall, so to achieve the same roundtrip delay (in ms), you can relax buffers to 64 (which already frees some CPU) and for 2nd also is more efficient, so audio streaming will be more stable even if you load CPU with other processing.

So coming back to Vins test, at 64 sample buffer. Babyface has round-trip latency about 5,5ms and iD22 has 7,4ms.
Well, but also with Babyface, he manages to run 123 instances of a test plugin, while at iD22 it was 99. With virtual instruments instances column, there is zero for iD22, because it probably won't be usable at this buffer length.
So its not only faster, but also more effecient and essentially, iD22 catches the Babyface performance with 128s buffer, but it naturally brought increase of the latency.

Of course, instance counts reflect performance of his particular system, for someone, who has much more powerful computer or doesn't run larger projects, this isn't necessarily always so dramatic. But it should give you some perspective.

Finally, in general sense, final latency performance evaluation might be very subjective.. you can find some people, who can track guitar sims with 12ms latency, they are used to it and do that without any apparent problems. Then you can find people, who can't do it and bitching about anything over 5
Similarly the project complexity and structure (eg. many serial effects and demanding instruments at one track vs more spreaded load) can be also very individual.. but more efficient interface will give you simply more headroom.

Michal
Quote:
Originally Posted by RightOnRome View Post
If you were holding both boxes in front of me I would tell you to kindly put the presonus back in the closet - XMAX pres sound fine for a small PA in a bar, but I cant stand XMAX for recording! Audient pres are awesome they are the same pres... THE SAME ...found in their large format consoles all over the world - I have a ASP800 and its fantastic, I am super happy with my decision to buy it!
Old 14th May 2017 | Show parent
  #73
Lives for gear
For me, I need 1 ms round trip. Here is the reason why.

Past 4.5 ms you can feel it when playing Edrums
Triggers need 3 ms to decide how loud they are hit
Midi wants 0.5 ms (Alyseum)
BFD wants 1 ms
I also want to use out board gear in Edrums just like real drums

So even with really good converters like I have running 1.7 ms round trip, it's still not fast enough to give me 4.5 ms because triggers, MIDI and BFD already put me into the negative to achieve 4.5 ms.

The triggers just suck eating up all that time.
Old 14th May 2017 | Show parent
  #74
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieNine View Post
That shall put an end to my quest of finding the best budget interface for the features that I need.

Sadly, I never heard of Echo Audiofire and can't find them around here.
Do not bother with Echo Audiofire - they went out of business and official driver support for recent operating systems like Windows 10 is not available, and will never be.

Buy the ID14 and have peace. I think even when purchased brand new, it represents very good value for money - good preamps, good converters, ADAT inputs, for a great price. It is certainly the best of the "budget" interfaces with definitely better than budget performance.
Old 14th May 2017 | Show parent
  #75
Quote:
Originally Posted by elegentdrum View Post
For me, I need 1 ms round trip. Here is the reason why.

Past 4.5 ms you can feel it when playing Edrums
Triggers need 3 ms to decide how loud they are hit
Midi wants 0.5 ms (Alyseum)
BFD wants 1 ms
I also want to use out board gear in Edrums just like real drums

So even with really good converters like I have running 1.7 ms round trip, it's still not fast enough to give me 4.5 ms because triggers, MIDI and BFD already put me into the negative to achieve 4.5 ms.

The triggers just suck eating up all that time.
Which converters give you the 1.7 ms roundtrip?
Old 14th May 2017
  #76
Holy moly broccoli. Huge thanks for your inputs , and especially @ kodebode , that info is awesome. And the comparisons, finest grade.

Latency is important for me, MIDI instruments, Reverb, Effects on instruments, Synths (DAW onboard).

ID14 shall be it once again. I won't consider anything else, looks like this small fella is a beast.

Thank you everyone!
Old 15th May 2017 | Show parent
  #77
Quote:
Originally Posted by RonnieNine View Post
Holy moly broccoli. Huge thanks for your inputs , and especially @ kodebode , that info is awesome. And the comparisons, finest grade.

Latency is important for me, MIDI instruments, Reverb, Effects on instruments, Synths (DAW onboard).

ID14 shall be it once again. I won't consider anything else, looks like this small fella is a beast.

Thank you everyone!
Please note that none of the current Audient interfaces have MIDI, but that is not a big deal, or a showstopper. Inexpensive MIDI USB devices are available. Which means you will need at least two MIDI ports, a USB 2.0 (or 3.0) for the ID14, and any other USB port to connect a MIDI device.

MIDI options :

a) You may already have a MIDI device that can connect to your computer via a USB cable. This may need install of MIDI drivers.

b) If your MIDI device only supports the 5 pin MIDI Din port standard connection, I would suggest you get a device like the one of the M-Audio MIDISport one's. (Uno, 1x1, 2x2, 4x4). MIDI Device connects to M-Audio MIDI/USB device, using standard 5 pin DIN MIDI cable, M-Audio MIDI/USB device connects to computer with USB cable. M-Audio MIDI/USB device will also need driver installation.

c) You could connect your existing audio interface(if it has MIDI ports), to a 2nd USB port, and use it only for MIDI (i.e ID14 for Audio in/out, and existing audio interface for MIDI).
Old 29th July 2017
  #78
Gear Nut
 

how is the audient id22 with latenc? i record my vocal tracks with plugins (eq, compression, reverb ) and cannot have my clients hear that echo in the headphones. I have a firestudio mobile that is useless now since my new mac has no firewire cables. Latency was never an issue with that unit. I never had to do anything special. just recorded at 128 and mixed at 1024. Will the id22 perform just as well as the firestudio mobile? I see that the id22 in usb 2.0. Im in the process of returning an apogee element 24. It did not power on out of the box so ill probably stay away from them. Seems like that was the best option as i need to be able to bypass the interface preamp section.
Old 7th August 2017 | Show parent
  #79
Gear Nut
Just tested my id22... two channels with eq & comp + reverb on bus works without any problems on 128, didn't hear (or feel :-)) any latency.

Now i must test it with 10 channels (+asp800) but i don't have enough cables
๐Ÿ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 410 views: 106624
Avatar for chinesewhiteman
chinesewhiteman 8th August 2019
replies: 791 views: 160770
Avatar for Nigel
Nigel 11th July 2020
replies: 228 views: 62907
Avatar for b481
b481 14th September 2020
replies: 81 views: 34105
Avatar for DistortingJack
DistortingJack 16th October 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…
๐Ÿ–จ๏ธ Show Printable Version
โœ‰๏ธ Email this Page
๐Ÿ” Search thread
๐ŸŽ™๏ธ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump