The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Audio Interface - Low Latency Performance Data Base
Old 22nd April 2014
  #571
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Cool, the 1.2 ms on playback reported is the same as the MOTU PCIe cards ( on Windows at least ) , sans DA. I suspect the reported Output Latency and the RTL is sans converters, as MOTU doesn't make a habit of reporting them.

Old 23rd April 2014
  #572
Lives for gear
 
norbury brook's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddie View Post
I'll probably stick with the one I have as long as it's not causing problems, but it's good to know that you can supply one if I need one.
Could you post a link to your website, and/or give me a price for a single unit, excluding sales tax, (including shipping cost to NZ if you know it).
If it's not too expensive then I might get it sooner as you suggest, rather than waiting for issues to arise.

Cheers
Paddie,

check Ebay, my brother lives in northern Queensland and I found a Chinese/hong Kong supplier of a T.I. Fire wire PCIe card that shipped to him no problem. I spec'd up a DAW for him a year or so ago and it's been running fine with the card and a focusrite since he built it.


If I can find the link I'll post it.


MC
Old 30th April 2014
  #573
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goddard View Post
Rather than re-testing every interface, a one-off (or otherwise limited) evaluation of the impact of sampling rate upon performance might be just as illuminating. Especially when nowadays many folks (likely including some of your own clients I'd venture) are running (or may at least be thinking about) 88,2/96kHz or even higher sampling rates.
I'll have a go at converting some of the sessions to 96K , I have some DAWbench DSP Cubase sessions already , I'll just need to convert the DAWbench VI's.

As I mentioned on the other thread, it will be impossible to retest all the interfaces, but I'll try and do some runs at 96K on future tests.

Old 4th May 2014
  #574
Gear Addict
 
Goddard's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
I'll have a go at converting some of the sessions to 96K , I have some DAWbench DSP Cubase sessions already , I'll just need to convert the DAWbench VI's.

As I mentioned on the other thread, it will be impossible to retest all the interfaces, but I'll try and do some runs at 96K on future tests.

Old 17th May 2014
  #575
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quick heads up.

I managed to give the Audient iD22 a run thru its paces under Win7 x64, driver installer and reported I/O confirmed its the same OEM USB controller and core driver used by some of the other USB interfaces on the market, which Audient have then applied their own Mixer applet and settings options to.

Performance was O.K overall , installation and driver operation was as expected and scaled consistently, unlike a recent experience with another of the boutiquey USB interfaces that hit the market of late.

I'll upload a revised list and some summary reports shortly.

Old 20th May 2014
  #576
Thanks! I use the iD22 daily under Win7 x64 and it performs quite well. I'm very interested in the revised list and summary, so I will keep checking back.

What other interfaces share the same USB controller and core driver?
Old 25th May 2014
  #577
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Metrik View Post
What other interfaces share the same USB controller and core driver?
The Presonus VSL series use the same OEM controller , core driver.

Performance was near identical , same reported In/Out , measured RTL a little higher due to possibly different AD/DA / DSP Mixer ( neither report AD/DA to host )

I'll post up the revised charts this week.


Last edited by TAFKAT; 27th May 2014 at 12:09 AM.. Reason: * Revised some info on RTL
Old 26th May 2014
  #578
Gear Addict
 
Goddard's Avatar
 

Hey V, Audient list some latency numbers at the bottom of the iD22 specs on their site (in case you weren't already aware):

iD22 - Specifications | Audient

Fwiw, ADCs are Burr Brown/TI PCM4220, and DACs are BB/TI PCM1798, and TI's datasheets give their respective digital filter group delays/latencies.

As you'll know, Audient's drivers are sourced from Thesycon.

Looking forward to seeing your results.
Old 26th May 2014
  #579
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goddard View Post
Hey V, Audient list some latency numbers at the bottom of the iD22 specs on their site (in case you weren't already aware):
Hey G,

Those listed numbers are for OSX, as there is no 032 sample setting in Windows. Interestingly the OSX numbers @ 032 are higher than the reported for Windows @ 064.

Looks like they are simply reported latencies, not measured.

Double checking the numbers , the iD22 is slightly higher than the Presonus at RTL , not lower as I noted earlier. Its minute, so might be the DSP mixer variance , not the AD/DA.

Old 28th May 2014
  #580
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Hey All,

Its been a while since the last update , I haven't had a lot of new interfaces across the bench the last 12 months of so , but I have added a few , summary below.





Added :

Mackie Onyx Blackbird : Posted a summary last September on its own, but will repeat here. Like Focusrite and Presonus , etc, using the TC Applied Dice FW controller and base driver , the unit has been updated to also be using the TC applied V4.x driver that has dramatically improved performance as it did for the previously mentioned.

The Mackie Unit has lower latency converters than the tested Presonus and Focusrite units , resulting in a lower RTL , placing the above those in LLP Ratings, just below the UFX Firewire.

Results were a little down perhaps because of the 4.1 version driver , but overall a very impressive result which has elevated the unit IMO to a very attractive option.

Audient iD22 : I know quite a few are interested in this little box. The unit uses the same OEM controller and base driver as the Presonus VSL Series, driver is solid and scales as expected as you ramp up the buffers. Overall Low Latency Performance is O.K , certainly very usable for most environments, those requiring/demanding higher efficiency at the lower buffer settings may find it not as suitable.

Tested but not included.

Prism Titan : I spent quite a lot of time trying to navigate the idiosyncrasies of this unit , too much time actually. The driver simply refused to install on the X58 chipset reference system that I had successfully installed and tested over 2 dozen units prior , and the iD22 since. Communication with their technical support resulted in an ongoing and increasingly frustrating chasing of the tail without resolution. They concluded I was incapable of installing the driver correctly , despite the fact that it installed on the X79 dev system without issue , and despite close to 30 other interfaces installing and working correctly , on the same core image , it had to be something I was doing wrong as far as they were concerned.

So Unfortunately I couldn't get a comparative result for the Database.

However, I did manage to install and attempt to do a comparative shootout on the newer X79 system against one of the better performing interfaces, the RME UCX. The testing had to be aborted as I could not get any consistency out of the driver once a heavy load was placed on it. What I found was that if you saved a resource heavy session and then attempt to reopen the session at the saved buffer setting, or even 2 -3 buffer settings above that originally working , the driver would collapse , ranging from a garbled slowed down mess, to heavily glitching at buffer settings 3 levels above.

I haven't experienced behaviour that extreme on any interface I can remember testing over the years , to say it was disturbing and totally unacceptable on a unit of that calibre, is an understatement.

I have no idea whether the issue has been addressed, nor do I care. The experience from start to finish is not something I care to ever revisit.

Old 28th May 2014
  #581
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Posted the updated charts, report and summary to the main DAWbench Website Here
Old 28th May 2014
  #582
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
Prism Titan :

… Communication with their technical support resulted in an ongoing and increasingly frustrating chasing of the tail without resolution.

They gave up responding to my emails regarding a latency problem with my Orpheus that never got resolved. Too many excuses.
Old 2nd June 2014
  #583
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quick heads up,

I have the opportunity to get a clients Roland StudioCapture onto the bench over the coming week.

I know a number of you have been interested in the comparative performance of the unit, so very happy to be finally getting one to put thru its paces.

I'll post up some details in the next week or so.

Old 3rd June 2014
  #584
Lives for gear
 
EastWest Lurker's Avatar
 

I would love to see how the UAD Apollos stack up.
Old 5th June 2014
  #585
Lives for gear
 
EastWest Lurker's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by EastWest Lurker View Post
I would love to see how the UAD Apollos stack up.
Bump.
Old 5th June 2014
  #586
Is there a reason the Focusrite Forte is not on this list.. I see that as a glaring omission over the last few versions of this database??

[QUOTE=TAFKAT;10141434]Hey All,

Its been a while since the last update , I haven't had a lot of new interfaces across the bench the last 12 months of so , but I have added a few , summary below.
Old 6th June 2014
  #587
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Did you really have to include the whole database in your quote as well ?

The answer is very simple, I have not had a Focusrite Forte across the bench , no one has offered to send me one for testing , and I am not in the position to ask Focusrite for a test unit.

Re the UAD Apollo's, same as above, also, TB is an absolute non event on Windows as is FW 800, so in short Apollos on windows are not exactly a go to.

This is a Windows based database , they may do O.K on an OSX comparative, on Windows I seriously doubt they would hold up well on these specific tests, its not their forte.

Old 6th June 2014
  #588
My apologies.. I meant to just quote only part of it. oppsie. My bad!

I didn't know if people generally disliked the forte.. We see things tossed around here for example about anything Neumann for example. I didn't know if there was some show stopper flaw keeping it off the list or not.

Thanks for clarifying.
I'm pretty happy with it. If you ever get to test someday. It will be interesting to see how it compares to the others in latency.

Sorry for the multi-page quoting..



Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
Did you really have to include the whole database in your quote as well ?

The answer is very simple, I have not had a Focusrite Forte across the bench , no one has offered to send me one for testing , and I am not in the position to ask Focusrite for a test unit.

Old 6th June 2014
  #589
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

All Good CJ,

I look forward to testing it actually, just haven't had the opportunity as yet.

If you are on Windows, can you list the reported In / Out latencies at the available latency buffer values please.

You can also test Round Trip Latency via the RTL Utility

That won't give a comparative on the performance at those latencies , but it will be a good start.

Old 6th June 2014
  #590
Sorry I'm on Mac here.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
All Good CJ,

I look forward to testing it actually, just haven't had the opportunity as yet.

If you are on Windows, can you list the reported In / Out latencies at the available latency buffer values please.

You can also test Round Trip Latency via the RTL Utility

That won't give a comparative on the performance at those latencies , but it will be a good start.

Old 6th June 2014
  #591
Lives for gear
 
Kimotei's Avatar
Awesome thread TAFKAT!

Im researching for wether to get Audient iD22 or SPL Crimson. They are both monitor controler/soundcard combos with high quality sound. Im very curious how they stack up against eachother regarding latency (on pc). Any chance of doing the SPL Crimson?
Old 12th June 2014
  #592
Gear Nut
 

I'm considering upgrading my audio interface. I've used the Focusrite 18i6 and it does a good job. However, I don't really need all these inputs since I don't use them all. Here are the specs for the a/d conversion:

The Scarletts use Cirrus Logic CS4272 24-bit codec (A/D and D/A converter). This is a high performance mid-range component, an excellent choice for an interface in this price range. The CS4272 is capable of supporting 192 kHz sample rate, though the Scarletts top out at 96 kHz.

I'm thinking could I perhaps benefit from getting less input and lower latency. I record straight from my mixer into the computer in stereo. Nothing else. I could get something with no latency right like the MOTU Babyface? One more question, how well do audio interfaces hold their value?
Old 16th June 2014
  #593
Here for the gear
 

I'm trying to decide between a RME Babyface and an Audient id22. I like the build quality and connectivity of the id22 but I'm concerned about the driver. I'm not crazy about the break out cable or the lack of a "line in" for outboard gear on the Babyface but the driver has been said to be rock solid. I'm running Sonar X3 under Windows x64. Great thread and it's shedding some light on my decision. Thanks.

Rocky
Old 16th June 2014
  #594
Here for the gear
 

Oops.Double post.

Rocky
Old 17th June 2014
  #595
Lives for gear
 
Kimotei's Avatar
Guys this is a pure latency thread!
Old 17th June 2014
  #596
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

A quick one with the Roland Studio Capture results and summary



Roland Studio Capture : This is a series of interfaces that I have wanted to qualify for a while , and I finally managed to get one across the bench. I am not sure whether the drivers are universal across the range - i.e Quad Capture / Octo Capture , but this being the latest I would expect the drivers to be the most up to date.

There has been a fair bit of discussion of not only this particular interface but also the others in the Capture range re Rolands claims of superior latency performance and some favourable reviews from some established music tech journos. In the past there has been some confusion navigating the low latency mode , which was at one point labelled Reduce CPU Load, which many thought was the opposite of what it actually did , but its clearly marked now, and was duly engaged.

Figures above are for the Low Latency Mode , so I was very surprised to see the double buffering on playback , which is not overly apparent at the lower latency settings, but become significantly more apparent as the buffers are ramped up.

Playback buffers are the largest I have seen on any of the tested interfaces, which brought about some interesting results across the benchmarks , which are based on playback buffer size mostly.

Benchmark results on the surface look very good at the respective latencies in comparison to the reference and most other interfaces, what is not evident unless highlighted is that the results are achieved in some cases at double the actual playback latency per respective buffer setting. The leveller is the RTL value , but the unit still achieves a higher rating due to the faux 032 setting , IMO.

The double buffering on playback forces you to work at a lower buffer setting when requiring comfortable real time playing of VI's , and those requiring tight RTL for Guitar Amp Sims and monitoring with FX will need to be mindful that anything above the 064 buffer setting ramps the RTL quite substantially.

If they got rid of the double buffering on playback this unit would be right up there, but in its current state, I would place it in the tread carefully basket.

Old 24th June 2014
  #597
Deleted User
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
absolute non event on Windows as is FW 800
RME FF800 on the SIIG or Syba TI XIO2213A-based FW800 PCIe cards work fine.
Old 24th June 2014
  #598
Gear Addict
 

How can the Mackie Onyx Blackbird FW be at the top of the list with such low cost, and the Mackie Onyx 1640i FW at the bottom?

Did another driver team develop for the Blackbird? Or is it possible that the whole database is off, with certain interfaces working better with certain mobo chipsets than with others? I know several years ago Echo Audio developed drivers for Mackie, yet the Echo devices place particularly low in these shootouts.

Everything except the Mackie interface looks believeable (because the other mackie is so low), and its high placement casts doubt on the whole thing, imo. Imo. Imo.
Old 25th June 2014
  #599
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patanjali View Post
RME FF800 on the SIIG or Syba TI XIO2213A-based FW800 PCIe cards work fine.
Never said it didn't work, I said FW800 as a whole is a non event.

A single FF800 has absolutely no advantage on FW800 over FW400.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldDragon View Post
How can the Mackie Onyx Blackbird FW be at the top of the list with such low cost, and the Mackie Onyx 1640i FW at the bottom?
Mackie use 3rd party controllers, the Blackbird uses the TC Applied Dice , which with the revision 4 driver gained a substantial improvement . Its the same controller/driver as Presonus and Focusrite FW units. All perform on par, the Mackie gained a better rating because it has a lower latency AD/DA and resulting RTL.

The 1640i is not based on the same controller/driver set, its the earlier co-developed one from Event as you noted, absolute chalk and cheese , and the results reflect that.

Old 25th June 2014
  #600
Gear Nut
Any chance to see results for new Fireface 802 ? I imagine it's similar to UCX/UFX but still would be nice to find out.
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…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
mattneale / Music Computers
15
gtxn / Music Computers
12
piotrekz / Music Computers
5

Forum Jump
Forum Jump