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
tascam uh7000 Audio Interfaces
Old 13th March 2018
  #331
Lives for gear
 
junior's Avatar
 

Just a heads-up that Tascam quietly updated their support page with Mac OS High Sierra compatibility.
Old 13th March 2018
  #332
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by junior View Post
Just a heads-up that Tascam quietly updated their support page with Mac OS High Sierra compatibility.
Could you give a link?

All I'm finding is old stuff.
Old 13th March 2018
  #333
Lives for gear
 
junior's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyxx View Post
Could you give a link?

All I'm finding is old stuff.
Sure thing! They took the link off of the front page and hid it for some reason. Here it is:
Compatible OS and Software | TASCAM

Looks like they completed their testing but didn't tell anyone, LOL.
Old 13th March 2018
  #334
Quote:
Originally Posted by junior View Post
Sure thing! They took the link off of the front page and hid it for some reason. Here it is:
Compatible OS and Software | TASCAM

Looks like they completed their testing but didn't tell anyone, LOL.
Here;s actually what happen:::


Probably about a month ago I emailed tascam asking about high sierra drivers cause according to their compatibility matrix on their site it said "in development". I then received an email back saying "according to our tech team the sierra drivers will also work with high sierra" Then quite magically after getting that email, I noticed the compatibility matrix updated showing support for High sierra.

Whether they were actually making a high sierra driver or knew all along that the sierra driver would work but were just too lazy to update their site and make it look like the tascam was still getting support lol. according to what I am seeing the latest driver that was released was 1.31 on 10-18-2016. Interestingly enough, I am 100% sure now thats what they did^^. I just noticed that before, the driver said (Sierra only) just like the ones below say El capitain only etc. Now it just shows the driver and doesnt have "sierra only" in quotations. Heh.

I would also like to make note I have hackintosh w/high sierra and windows 7 and the latency in high sierra is pretty awful. @192KHZ, my roundtrip latency is around 12ms in High sierra. And then in windows 7 its 6.7ms. Not sure why the big difference. Maybe the tascam guys are windows people and the unit was designed around windows. My issue with all of this is recording @192 or even 96 is really not that practical because of how big the file sizes are. As you go down, the latency gets worse. I think @44.1 in win7 my roundtrip latency is 15ms.
Old 13th March 2018
  #335
Lives for gear
 
junior's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by doom3crazy View Post
I just noticed that before, the driver said (Sierra only) just like the ones below say El capitain only etc. Now it just shows the driver and doesnt have "sierra only" in quotations. Heh.
I'll bet you're right. I remember seeing the "Sierra Only" designation too. Now, it doesn't say that, LOL. Friggen' lazy asses.

I too emailed a few months ago but didn't even receive a reply. Glad that you got one, at least.
Old 20th May 2018
  #336
Noob question - Any recommendations for running external hardware processors with the UH7K in a mastering scenario?

In multitrack mode, I'm routing computer 1 - 2 to output and input to monitor, when turning the fader to 'input', I'm still not able to hear the effects in the headphones.

The DAW is Cubase pro 8.5 on Win10.
Old 20th May 2018
  #337
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by vynilr View Post
Noob question - Any recommendations for running external hardware processors with the UH7K in a mastering scenario?

In multitrack mode, I'm routing computer 1 - 2 to output and input to monitor, when turning the fader to 'input', I'm still not able to hear the effects in the headphones.

The DAW is Cubase pro 8.5 on Win10.
I don't think 2x2 is good enough for that.

I think you would need a 2x4 at minimum to do an AD/DA loop, and still hear your monitors. Unless, that is you are not monitoring from the UH7000. Maybe then you could route it correctly.

Headphone amp is shared with the DAC line outs. I'm also not sure if it's clear what your setup is.
Old 21st May 2018
  #338
UH out -> xfilter -> xpressor -> UH in
Set up an fx channel in cubase with the BFD3 drum buss of concern to be processed

The gain reduction lights do show up on the xpressor. i realize this is not an optimal setup but was hoping to get by with one UH as i like it a lot for the money.
As i do have an ID14 laying around so i may try the ASIOforall thing.

Then the hardware flow would be

ID14 out -> xfilter -> xpressor -> UH in
UH out -> speakers

makes theoretical sense so keep fingers crossed i'm not opening another can of worms with Win10 restricted hardware management that have not evolved much for 15+ years.
Old 21st May 2018
  #339
Lives for gear
 

As already mentioned such setup with sole UH7000 doesn't have enough I/Os for described task, as you won't have any path for listening.
Software aggregation with iD14 is not suitable, first of all it generally sucks, when it's not supported by interface vendor and you have no way to externally sync your devices like via wordclock, because it inherently alters audio, then both Tascam and iD14 has already pretty mediocre latency performance for further deteriorating by another software aggregation layer.

Generally if you have some outboard analog hardware, then you need to step up from affordable USB stereo devices with various limitations and get some interface or modular setup, which has enough I/Os for the job.
This has nothing to do with hardware management of Windows 10.

Michal
Old 22nd May 2018
  #340
OK.Thanks all for the replies.

Being on desktop and hardware preamps, I'm interested in PCIe options with a DAC / break out box that will provide sufficient channel count. Seems like 4 x 4 would cover all situations. Looking through recent product releases, I'm not a huge fan of the ongoing trend of interfaces with integrated preamps and also would like to avoid paying a brand name like RME or downgrade from the UH in terms of conversion goodness,
Old 22nd May 2018
  #341
Lives for gear
 

PCIe interface with external or good internal converters is certainly an option towards to modular system I had in mind. If you have or purchase outboard pres and monitor controller and don't need portable connectivity to laptops, then it's still my favorite solution (I use RME AIO at home, RME AES and SSL MADI cards at studio, Lynx previously.. all of them are rock solid).
I don't get your point regarding paying for brand name in case of RME, it's not expensive, you just pay for professional gear and its price level is comparable to say Lynx, Digigram, Apogee, Sound Devices.. all with competent design, engineering and support. One can quickly lost his perspective in a sea of budget options made in China (nothing against that, if it's there is good Q/C, but well I can see reasons, why some companies prefer domestic manufacturing, which has its price).

There can be several choices, say E44 by Lynx or RayDat by RME combined with some outboard converters/standalone working interfaces.
On the other hand, you might also wait for reviews upcoming iD44, if you like the sound of your iD14 pres. Audient promised some improved drivers for iD range, which you could test also with your iD14, when it will be released. It definitely won't bring it to performance level of good PCIe interfaces, however if you find, it's sufficient for your use, you can upgrade to iD44, which could have enough I/Os for your outboard. If the performance won't be enough, then you can look for RME RayDat or used 9652 (for older PCI bus) and hook iD44 via ADATs and use it just as analog frontend/converter.

Michal
Old 22nd May 2018
  #342
The ID14 was bought for travel / casual use and I'm thinking i may still hold on to it for that purpose. While decent in sound quality i still very much prefer the UH though.

What concerns me a little bit is when a manufacturer holds such a big part of the market as seems to be the case with RME pro audio modular interface components, then they can start dictating prices. But I don't have enough knowledge or perpective on a high number of I/F to say whether their famed driver stability is myth or reality. On the other hand the vast majority of manufacturers seem all to be going the route of integrated plug and play boxes.

I like the modular approach for the flexibility and integration with hardware processing. Seems like i need to do my homework in understanding the ramifications involved in such a set up, for example ...

Motherboard => HDSPe AIO => AI4S and AOS combo is 4 TRS cables

Is a patch bay used to connect instruments/preamps effect processors to instead of having to mess with the flimsy PCIe?
If yes, what are the different methods for breaking down the number of I/O's from the AIS and AOS to the patch bay?
If yes, does this call for custom cable solutions?
Old 22nd May 2018
  #343
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vynilr View Post
What concerns me a little bit is when a manufacturer holds such a big part of the market as seems to be the case with RME pro audio modular interface components, then they can start dictating prices. But I don't have enough knowledge or perpective on a high number of I/F to say whether their famed driver stability is myth or reality.
Well, in my long time experience, it's not myth and I have similarly good experience with Lynx. Again with regards to pricing, it's not expensive, you just can't compare that to offshore manufactured budget choices aimed primarily to amateur market (frankly vast majority of sold gear nowadays, that's also why I don't think, RME has so high market share..). To judge that, just look to some shop and compare it with prices of similar professional interfaces. Of course, there can be bit different pricing at EU vs USA or AU, but that applies also in reverse, for example if I would like to get any US made imported gear.. like Mesa Boogie combo or say AVID HD I/O.

Quote:
On the other hand the vast majority of manufacturers seem all to be going the route of integrated plug and play boxes.
This is just response to customers demands and needs. RME also make very good professional all-in-one interfaces like 802, UFX or small Babyface Pro.. which are also very stable, regardless it's not for PCIe, just with tad worse performance. I've mentioned that couple of times before, it's primarily engineering, company attitude and development budget, which can certainly affect decision about doing own perfect audio streaming solution from scratch or integrating some available 3rd party OEM thing with certain compromises.

Quote:
I like the modular approach for the flexibility and integration with hardware processing. Seems like i need to do my homework in understanding the ramifications involved in such a set up, for example ...

Motherboard => HDSPe AIO => AI4S and AOS combo is 4 TRS cables

Is a patch bay used to connect instruments/preamps effect processors to instead of having to mess with the flimsy PCIe?
If yes, what are the different methods for breaking down the number of I/O's from the AIS and AOS to the patch bay?
If yes, does this call for custom cable solutions?
That really depends on how often you'd like to repatch that.. in most cases, you can leave the end in computer permanently connected and replug TRS or XLRs (depending on other gear) at the other end as you need without any concern about "filmsy" PCIe.
The similar thing would apply to say Lynx E44 with breakout cable, where you have 4 female and 4 male XLRs, possibly you can get similar cable with TRS.
Btw. if you already have UH7000, then you could get AIO without any expansion to meet your 4 I/O requirement, because it has built-in stereo analog I/Os and UH7000 could be connected via AES and work also as your monitoring DAC with volume control.

Patchbays has definitely its application, if you really need to re-patch often, need high density connections (with TT/Bantam patchbays you can have up to 48 I/Os at 1U) and also there could be what's called normaling, which allows you to have some fixed predefined connections (without any jumper cable), which could be broken and signal can easily pass through another device. So you can for instance have default connection from preamp to A/D converter, where is possible to insert compressor, EQ or whatever suitable.
But well, good patchbay is definitely some investment (although long term) and you need some justification for its use.

Michal
Old 23rd May 2018
  #344
Quote:
Originally Posted by msmucr View Post
Well, in my long time experience, it's not myth and I have similarly good experience with Lynx. Again with regards to pricing, it's not expensive, you just can't compare that to offshore manufactured budget choices aimed primarily to amateur market (frankly vast majority of sold gear nowadays, that's also why I don't think, RME has so high market share..). To judge that, just look to some shop and compare it with prices of similar professional interfaces. Of course, there can be bit different pricing at EU vs USA or AU, but that applies also in reverse, for example if I would like to get any US made imported gear.. like Mesa Boogie combo or say AVID HD I/O.
Thanks for sharing your long time experience. It is valuable and a reason why I never get tired browsing through GL threads as part of critical shopping experience. I looked through more price competitive options such as Marian or ESI on Thomann.de but as a weekend performer and producer can't afford downtime troubleshooting driver issues. On a similar note, I found threads reporting driver stability concerns with multi PCIe Lynx application so perhaps it is better to stick with RME.

Quote:
Originally Posted by msmucr View Post
That really depends on how often you'd like to repatch that.. in most cases, you can leave the end in computer permanently connected and replug TRS or XLRs (depending on other gear) at the other end as you need without any concern about "filmsy" PCIe.
The similar thing would apply to say Lynx E44 with breakout cable, where you have 4 female and 4 male XLRs, possibly you can get similar cable with TRS.
Btw. if you already have UH7000, then you could get AIO without any expansion to meet your 4 I/O requirement, because it has built-in stereo analog I/Os and UH7000 could be connected via AES and work also as your monitoring DAC with volume control.
Seems like patchbays are overkill for a single man part time operation. And yes, I can probably work around having to fumble with the card side of connections.

Does sticking AES data transfer protocol warrant use of components across multiple manufacturer? Will a RME HDSPe AES work with a Lynx breakout cable ?

https://www.thomann.de/de/rme_hdspe_aes32.htm

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/det...xlr-terminated

You mentioned the Raydat and there's also the AIO for a little less money. Seems like the AIO has been around for a while. How does the latency compare between, HDSPe AES, Raydat and AIO?
Old 23rd May 2018
  #345
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vynilr View Post
On a similar note, I found threads reporting driver stability concerns with multi PCIe Lynx application so perhaps it is better to stick with RME.
I don't think, that would apply to your situation. For instance I worked on system with two AES-16 cards without any probs.

Quote:
Does sticking AES data transfer protocol warrant use of components across multiple manufacturer? Will a RME HDSPe AES work with a Lynx breakout cable ?
Components yes (in a sense, you can get RME card and connect say Lynx Aurora or Apogee Rosetta converter to it or vice versa.. AES protocol is the same), cables not. Most vendors has its own breakout cables sold as an accessory for their gear, in case of RME, it's either supplied directly with the card or ALVA (their partner ALVA Cableware – ALVA professionelle Kabel & Audio Produkte) makes those.
If you want to make some special direct connection without XLRs, like DB25 to DB25 with other pinout, it's necessary to check manuals, where pinouts are documented. In case of DB25 the most common pinouts are either Tascam or Yamaha.
https://www.sweetwater.com/sweetcare...-pinout-guide/

Quote:
You mentioned the Raydat and there's also the AIO for a little less money. Seems like the AIO has been around for a while. How does the latency compare between, HDSPe AES, Raydat and AIO?
All those are basically the same cards, with common driver and performance characteristics. The difference is in I/O set.
RayDat has four ADAT optical ports (up to 32 ch of I/O, this gets halved with doubling of sample rate) and one stereo AES/EBU.
AES card has 16 channels of I/O over 8 stereo AES/EBU pairs.
So those are digital only.
AIO has combination of analog and digital I/Os. There is one stereo analog I/O and one unbalanced headphone out. Then you have one stereo AES/EBU I/O, one stereo SPDIF and finally there is one optical ADAT port for connection of some external converter/pre.

Actual latency also depends on used AD/DA converters, so there might be slight differences in RTL figures according to external converter, you're using, but nothing to be so concerned about.

Michal
Old 27th May 2018
  #346
This is good input that's prompted me to take a more holistic look at the hybrid integration as a whole before spending a penny. Separate thread opened here -

Audio interface / patchbay combo advice for hybrid setup
Old 5th October 2018
  #347
Lives for gear
 

Would u still recommend this dac?I have id 4 and I am not happy with it for mixing I couldn't match my apogee mixes and I can't even master with it so I have to pay for master now never done that before.I didn't liked the brightness of both converters.What its the case with the tascam?I dont want bargain io and functions if the sound itsnot top notch.Is it the converter pin point detailed like the duet 2 ?The Audient headphone amp its very weak heard that the tascam its much better?
I doubt between this or audiofuse but something its telling me that the audiofuse converter would be nowhere near as good.
Old 5th October 2018
  #348
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
The UH-7000 is more comparable to the iD22, so yes, it's going to sound better than the iD4.

Headphone amp is also going to be great.

In my mind, UH-7000 is just one of those classic pieces that "got it right" so it's always going to be useful to me.

Some people say the drivers and latency performance aren't really comparable to what's considered professional, but I have always used mine as a SPDIF expander, rather than as an interface.
Old 5th October 2018
  #349
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyxx View Post
The UH-7000 is more comparable to the iD22, so yes, it's going to sound better than the iD4.

Headphone amp is also going to be great.

In my mind, UH-7000 is just one of those classic pieces that "got it right" so it's always going to be useful to me.

Some people say the drivers and latency performance aren't really comparable to what's considered professional, but I have always used mine as a SPDIF expander, rather than as an interface.
Id 22 and id 4 sounds simillar very bright converters the clock its great fast transients.But.the brightness makes.me.cut too.much high mids.and.I.end.up. with dull master.Ive tried it.with different.monitors.headphones same its.very bright the low.mids are almost non existent.The lowend on the duet 2 has amazing punch while the audient its blurry thin bland sounding.
I don't know what to do duet 2 its great but the highs are very shrill excited.
Heard only good things about the uh7000 sound how would u describe it is detail city?I am very precise looking to upgrade speakers as well to aps coax or rocks.

I tought about the Dangerous Source but have feeling that uh7000 would match that sound
Old 5th October 2018
  #350
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
I haven't listened to the UH DAC in a while but I never remembered it being "bright" everything about it has always been on the slightly warmer side.

Excessive brightness is usually more related to speakers and maybe headphones to me. Although I did own one DAC (Emotiva) that had sort of a noticeably bright top end.

My Focal speakers are much more gentle on the top than my old KRK or Polk.

"Detail city" is happening with the DAC I use now, the Topping DX7s. You can easily hear separation of sounds and instruments, it's a great feature.

There have been a new generation of DACs come out since the UH-7000 was introduced. (And others of the same vintage.)
Old 5th October 2018
  #351
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyxx View Post
I haven't listened to the UH DAC in a while but I never remembered it being "bright" everything about it has always been on the slightly warmer side.

Excessive brightness is usually more related to speakers and maybe headphones to me. Although I did own one DAC (Emotiva) that had sort of a noticeably bright top end.

My Focal speakers are much more gentle on the top than my old KRK or Polk.

"Detail city" is happening with the DAC I use now, the Topping DX7s. You can easily hear separation of sounds and instruments, it's a great feature.

There have been a new generation of DACs come out since the UH-7000 was introduced. (And others of the same vintage.)
The audient and the apogee sounds way brighter then other I've used including symphony.I look for something professional grade like the apogee but without this high freq coloration.Tought uh 7000 might me for me I heard my mixes on apogee and audient and men ppl say small difference between converters not true its massive difference.I used to master loud on duet the audient saturate like crazy unusable.Sadly apogee didnt released any new duets.
What other dac might be alternative?
Old 5th October 2018
  #352
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by geeorge View Post
The audient and the apogee sounds way brighter then other I've used including symphony.I look for something professional grade like the apogee but without this high freq coloration.Tought uh 7000 might me for me I heard my mixes on apogee and audient and men ppl say small difference between converters not true its massive difference.I used to master loud on duet the audient saturate like crazy unusable.Sadly apogee didnt released any new duets.
What other dac might be alternative?
You know I'm kind of glad that old "war" is over and people can admit these things sound different. That was rough for a while.

I'm not sure if you're looking for a DAC or a recording interface (all in one.)
Old 5th October 2018
  #353
I own both Audient iD22 and tascam UH7000 and use the audient only for practice because of its relative portability for travelling.
The tascam is definitely in a different league in terms of converter quality and still being used for recording projects until better converter with higher channel counts comes along.
Old 5th October 2018
  #354
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyxx View Post
You know I'm kind of glad that old "war" is over and people can admit these things sound different. That was rough for a while.

I'm not sure if you're looking for a DAC or a recording interface (all in one.)
It doesn't matter if its good quality I have only behringer neutron at the moment to record .I can get the uh 7000 cheap but if its not much better then audient id 4 I would look at dangerous d box or apogee symphony mk 1 second hand I want to sign with good labels In future I dont want to compromise anymore.
I wanted to process with outboard compression but latest sw sounds great enough with Nebula.and Aqua I don't need much external mastering stuff.I listened masters from pro I paid .and my nebula mastering its better for.my ears
Old 5th October 2018
  #355
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by geeorge View Post
It doesn't matter if its good quality I have only behringer neutron at the moment to record .I can get the uh 7000 cheap but if its not much better then audient id 4 I would look at dangerous d box or apogee symphony mk 1 second hand I want to sign with good labels In future I dont want to compromise anymore.
I don't know if it's specifically intentional or anything, but I record all my analog synths and drum machines with the UH-7000 fed from a Mackie 1202 VLZ4.

I do get compliments on the synth sounds from people who have no idea what was used.

The UH-7000 also really excels at acoustic singer/songwriter material, which is a completely opposite thing I have tested it on.

You have to use a medium high buffer setting (block size) with most computers.
But you can use direct monitoring in the standard old fashioned way to monitor your live tracks in real time. In this way it's not too different than the Audient I guess. I monitor my synths directly off the Mackie. So the UH-7000 is being used simply as a capture device.

If you want something speedy and modern I'd be looking at the Presonus Quantum (which I use) or the UA Apollo stuff, RME, MOTU, and so on. Not sure where the Symphony fits in, or the D Box.

My personal monitoring DAC is a Topping DX7s as I have previously mentioned. It's very smooth on the top but it's not "dark." Just smoother than a lot of the standard interfaces (Quantum, etc.)

I imported it from China but the seller I used got it to me in 6 days. You do need the remote with it as well, which is not included for some reason.
Old 5th October 2018
  #356
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vynilr View Post
I own both Audient iD22 and tascam UH7000 and use the audient only for practice because of its relative portability for travelling.
The tascam is definitely in a different league in terms of converter quality and still being used for recording projects until better converter with higher channel counts comes along.
Thanks for that mate really appreciate people with proper hearing.Sometimes ppl here don't hear the small differences which separates the boys from mens.My favourite claim its very small difference u can't hear between converters thats a epic lie.If you shoot it out ye that's not ****ing saturation boxes but when u use them long time u find what small differences do end up into massive difference.
Old 5th October 2018
  #357
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyxx View Post
I don't know if it's specifically intentional or anything, but I record all my analog synths and drum machines with the UH-7000 fed from a Mackie 1202 VLZ4.

I do get compliments on the synth sounds from people who have no idea what was used.

The UH-7000 also really excels at acoustic singer/songwriter material, which is a completely opposite thing I have tested it on.

You have to use a medium high buffer setting (block size) with most computers.
But you can use direct monitoring in the standard old fashioned way to monitor your live tracks in real time. In this way it's not too different than the Audient I guess. I monitor my synths directly off the Mackie. So the UH-7000 is being used simply as a capture device.

If you want something speedy and modern I'd be looking at the Presonus Quantum (which I use) or the UA Apollo stuff, RME, MOTU, and so on. Not sure where the Symphony fits in, or the D Box.

My personal monitoring DAC is a Topping DX7s as I have previously mentioned. It's very smooth on the top but it's not "dark." Just smoother than a lot of the standard interfaces (Quantum, etc.)

I imported it from China but the seller I used got it to me in 6 days. You do need the remote with it as well, which is not included for some reason.
I make tech house and deep house so I need punchy sound I really like the audient clock it does work for that genre the transients are extremely fast combined with my ribbon speakers they are really fast.But the dac its too happy sounding for me its not as clinical as the duet which was presenting the audio naked the harsh truth.No idea if the uh7000 have this dry naked sound as well.
I got 20 quit wi fi reference headphones and I become extremely critical because they don't hide **** even my dt 880 are not as good and cost 10 times more.
Some people said that the uh 7000 its the best dac under 1 k don't know if that's true but the numbers and this amazing clock might backup this claim.

Is it the latency that bad ?the id 4 its not good at latency start crackling with half the duet 2
Old 5th October 2018
  #358
Gear Guru
I almost bought the 7000 since they are really good deals used. I record stand alone so decided to get Sound Devices Mixpre6. I'd heard the converters and pres are excellent. It does sound good but am curious how it would stack up to the Tascam.
Old 5th October 2018
  #359
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
The reason I mentioned latency is I don't think the Tascam is known for being great and the Audient is also known for being not that great too.

The reason I explained the way I used it is that it doesn't matter to me.

You should also check out the Focusrite Clarett if you have a thunderbolt computer. That's a really good all-around option that ticks a lot of boxes.

Your distortion problems are not related to your choice of AD/DA conversion.
Old 5th October 2018
  #360
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeyxx View Post
The reason I mentioned latency is I don't think the Tascam is known for being great and the Audient is also known for being not that great too.

The reason I explained the way I used it is that it doesn't matter to me.

You should also check out the Focusrite Clarett if you have a thunderbolt computer. That's a really good all-around option that ticks a lot of boxes.

Your distortion problems are not related to your choice of AD/DA conversion.
The saturation when u crank the headphone output it was reported from other users as well its cheap ****.Duet 2 could of damage ur hearing the headphone output its mega loud but u said that the uh 7000 its the best u heard so its probably the same ballpark.Seen reviews that people prefer it from the Quartet that's solid considering that the duet and quartet are similar to the symphony.
Might try it in the end it will be better then the id 4 more then likely there are near 15 db difference in the da section
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…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump