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
PreSonus Announces Quantum 2 Thunderbolt Interface Audio Interfaces
Old 3rd October 2017
  #1
News Desk Editor
 
The Press Desk's Avatar
 

PreSonus Announces Quantum 2 Thunderbolt Interface

PreSonus Announces Quantum 2 Thunderbolt Interface-presonus-quantum_2-front_4311x673.jpg

PreSonus Announces Quantum 2 Thunderbolt Interface-presonus-quantum_2-back_4046x599.jpg

PreSonus Announces Quantum 2 Thunderbolt Interface

Following up on the success of its top-of-the-line Quantum audio/MIDI interface, PreSonus has expanded the series with the release of the new Quantum 2. Slightly smaller than the original Quantum, the 22x24-channel Quantum 2 shares its larger sibling’s status as PreSonus®’ fastest and best-sounding audio/MIDI interface, taking advantage of the high-speed Thunderbolt™ 2 bus and a no-frills, direct-to-DAW signal path to achieve extremely low latency. Cutting-edge 24-bit, 192 kHz converters with 120 dB of dynamic range and PreSonus’ recallable XMAX microphone preamps combine to deliver superb audio quality. For more I/O channels, simply stack up to 4 Quantum 2 interfaces via Thunderbolt to create a monster 80x80 system.

The Quantum 2 offers two combo mic/instrument inputs and two combo mic/line inputs, each with a digitally controlled XMAX preamp and +48V phantom power. You also get four ¼-inch TRS line outputs, and a headphone output with dedicated volume control. With ADAT Optical I/O and S/PDIF stereo digital I/O, you can have up to 18 additional digital inputs and outputs for a total of 22 in and 24 out. BNC word clock I/O ensures your Quantum 2 and other digital audio devices operate in tight sync. Of course, you get MIDI I/O, too.

With the Quantum 2, your audio interface is an integrated extension of your recording environment. Launch the included PreSonus Studio One® Artist DAW, and you’ll find full preamp control functions integrated into your recording environment. Most of the Quantum 2’s features can also be controlled in PreSonus’ free UC Surface control software, so even if you use third-party recording software, you can remotely access the features. To top it off, Quantum 2 owners get the Studio Magic Plug-in Suite free. With its pro features, flexible software, and abundant I/O, the Quantum 2 joins the original Quantum as PreSonus’ most powerful combination audio interfaces/studio command centers and fits into any recording and production environment.

The Quantum 2 interface will start to become available in late October 2017 at an anticipated MAP/street price of $699.95.

For more information, please visit www.presonus.com/products/Quantum-2.
Attached Thumbnails
PreSonus Announces Quantum 2 Thunderbolt Interface-presonus-quantum_2-front_4311x673.jpg   PreSonus Announces Quantum 2 Thunderbolt Interface-presonus-quantum_2-back_4046x599.jpg  
Old 3rd October 2017
  #2
Looks really good but only Thunderbolt
Old 3rd October 2017
  #3
Lives for gear
 
Solar's Avatar
 

What???? Was expecting the opposite totally. And as @heraldo_jones mentioned "just TBolt"???

I guess the only few hardware developers that are not forgetting potential users that are still using Win7 that Thunderbolt is almost null to make it work are RME & Antelope who still give the user the choice from USB 2 or 3.1 to Thunderbolt. What happens @PreSonus? What was the idea here? I was expecting Quantum 2 to be either a bigger version of the first one and that you guys would have given user the option with USB connection.

There must be a niche for this little brother of Quantum. And I wouldn't even call it Quantum 2 (Maybe Quantum Lite or Mobile).

Congrats on this little baby
Old 3rd October 2017
  #4
Gear Maniac
An AVB port is missing.

Can one mix and match Quantum and Quantum 2 interfaces when daisy chaining with Thunderbolt?
Old 3rd October 2017
  #5
Lives for gear
Looks pretty good to me. This could shift me away from Apogee
Old 3rd October 2017
  #6
Lives for gear
 
projektk's Avatar
 

Ummmmm I'll be honest I was extremely shocked this had 2 TB ports lol
Old 3rd October 2017
  #7
Gear Addict
 

Impressive Package !!!
Old 3rd October 2017
  #8
Gear Head
 
Ave.'s Avatar
Can you bypass the pres on the mic inputs ?
Old 4th October 2017
  #9
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ave. View Post
Can you bypass the pres on the mic inputs ?
The 1/4inch line inputs bypass the mic preamps. The XLR inputs can not bypass the mic pres.
Old 4th October 2017
  #10
Gear Maniac
Presonus: we're so excited to offer an amazingly spec'd Thunderbolt interface at an unprecedented price point in 2017.


Antelope: hold my beer...




jokes aside, what an amazing time to be making music with digital audio. The price point and quality available in 2017 compared to just 3 years ago is insane. cheers to Presonus for another success in their Quantum range and to everyone making exceptional music on a budget. the future is now
Old 28th October 2017
  #11
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by citrusonic View Post
Presonus: we're so excited to offer an amazingly spec'd Thunderbolt interface at an unprecedented price point in 2017.


Antelope: hold my beer...




jokes aside, what an amazing time to be making music with digital audio. The price point and quality available in 2017 compared to just 3 years ago is insane. cheers to Presonus for another success in their Quantum range and to everyone making exceptional music on a budget. the future is now
There's no contest between Quantum and Antelope when it comes to driver performance at low latencies. Quantum's drivers (to the surprise of many of us) perform near the top RME/Lynx level which is important for people who use many VI's and effects plugins in our projects and also need extremely low latency. Antelope's drivers do not offer the same performance.

There is definitely a niche for people who need top-level driver performance and only a few on-board ins/outs. I'm looking to upgrade my Babyface gen1, and the Babyface Pro doesn't really offer me much more to justify the cost. In addition to better driver performance, the Quantum 2 has an extra set of ADAT ports and some decent plugins included. In the same price range, the Quantum 2 offers more than the Babyface Pro for my needs. I like the Antelope feature set, but won't touch their interfaces to lower driver performance.
Old 28th October 2017
  #12
Gear Maniac
 
MichaelDroste's Avatar
 

thank you for the antelope driver info - didn't know that
Old 29th October 2017
  #13
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelDroste View Post
thank you for the antelope driver info - didn't know that
Driver performance stats can be found in TAFKAT's thread
Old 29th October 2017
  #14
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Why only thunderbolt, you ask?

Simple. Last time I checked the only way to get low latency like that is with Thunderbolt or a PCIe card.
If you're expecting this kind of performance on USB, I have the feeling you're in for a long disappointing wait.
Last time I checked, USB couldn't come close. It's better now, but not that much better.

I'm interested in this interface to pair with my laptop s a secondary workstation. Does anyone know if they are daisychainable?
Old 29th October 2017
  #15
Gear Maniac
 

How about a PCIE version while we are at it?
Old 30th October 2017
  #16
Lives for gear
 
blackcom's Avatar
 

External PSU?

No.
Old 30th October 2017
  #17
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
Why only thunderbolt, you ask?

Simple. Last time I checked the only way to get low latency like that is with Thunderbolt or a PCIe card.
If you're expecting this kind of performance on USB, I have the feeling you're in for a long disappointing wait.
Last time I checked, USB couldn't come close. It's better now, but not that much better.

I'm interested in this interface to pair with my laptop s a secondary workstation. Does anyone know if they are daisychainable?
The latest results in the TAFKAT thread show that USB 3 can be as fast as TB when implemented properly (RME in this case). You lose the ability to daisy chain, however.
Old 30th October 2017
  #18
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by nonstatic View Post
The latest results in the TAFKAT thread show that USB 3 can be as fast as TB when implemented properly (RME in this case). You lose the ability to daisy chain, however.
Cool! I see that USB has come away and it's much closer now than the last time I checked.
That's good news for anyone I suppose.

A few things to note.
- The RME interface he tested with both TB2 and USB3 is still quicker quicker on TB than it is on USB3, by over half a ms at 32 buffer.

- The Presonus Quantum (which is TB only) is quicker still, by about half a ms at 32 buffer.

- The quantum offers the use if even lower buffers than 32 samples, furthering its advantage of about 1ms of RTL over the Fireface UFX+ running on USB3 (2.085ms vs 3.187ms).

My question is: Is there anything in the TB protocol or the practicality of using TB over USB3 that would allow for the use of lower buffers than 32 in a stable fashion?
I notice that the two companies who allow it so far (Presonus and Slate, the latter of course not yet on the market) both use TB, not USB3).
RME have been at the top of that game for years and I don't recall them releasing drivers that allow for their products to run at lower buffers than 32.
Is that just because computers are getting stronger and stronger? Or does TB (and with it PCIe) have a stability edge over USB3 that allows for these lower buffers?

The result, for now is:
On a per buffer comparison USB3 can get you down very close to PCIe/TB latency, but falling just short of matching it, but some of these new TB2 interfaces are allowing you to run at even lower buffers, making a significant jump in lowest possible latency.

We'll see how practical those lower buffers are at the moment, but I welcome it.
I think it means that more software developers will focus on making their plugins/DAWs perform well at low buffers and I think that will be good news for everyone.

All in all, good to see USB3 interfaces are offering what I deem acceptable latencies. I stand corrected, it is not the night and day difference that it used to be. I think that's good news for all.
Lots of good news in DAW land of late, rejoice!
Old 31st October 2017
  #19
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
Cool! I see that USB has come away and it's much closer now than the last time I checked.
That's good news for anyone I suppose.

A few things to note.
- The RME interface he tested with both TB2 and USB3 is still quicker quicker on TB than it is on USB3, by over half a ms at 32 buffer.

- The Presonus Quantum (which is TB only) is quicker still, by about half a ms at 32 buffer.

- The quantum offers the use if even lower buffers than 32 samples, furthering its advantage of about 1ms of RTL over the Fireface UFX+ running on USB3 (2.085ms vs 3.187ms).

My question is: Is there anything in the TB protocol or the practicality of using TB over USB3 that would allow for the use of lower buffers than 32 in a stable fashion?
I notice that the two companies who allow it so far (Presonus and Slate, the latter of course not yet on the market) both use TB, not USB3).
RME have been at the top of that game for years and I don't recall them releasing drivers that allow for their products to run at lower buffers than 32.
Is that just because computers are getting stronger and stronger? Or does TB (and with it PCIe) have a stability edge over USB3 that allows for these lower buffers?

The result, for now is:
On a per buffer comparison USB3 can get you down very close to PCIe/TB latency, but falling just short of matching it, but some of these new TB2 interfaces are allowing you to run at even lower buffers, making a significant jump in lowest possible latency.

We'll see how practical those lower buffers are at the moment, but I welcome it.
I think it means that more software developers will focus on making their plugins/DAWs perform well at low buffers and I think that will be good news for everyone.

All in all, good to see USB3 interfaces are offering what I deem acceptable latencies. I stand corrected, it is not the night and day difference that it used to be. I think that's good news for all.
Lots of good news in DAW land of late, rejoice!
The reason they can use low buffer sizes at even 8 samples has little to do with Thunderbolt itself and more to do with the performance of CPUs that support Thunderbolt. By limiting the interfaces to Thunderbolt they are also limiting them to only the latest CPUs which can support Thunderbolt. These CPUs have much improved CPU performance over previous generations and can comfortably or reasonably operate at such low samples.

The other interesting development is the efficiency of the DAWs. On the software side we have seen coding that allows the software to take better advantage of multithread CPUs, quicker RAMs, speedy Solid State Drives or even faster NVME M.2 Storage. Furthermore some DAWs now offer separate input record and monitoring buffers which can be set lower than the playback buffer. This allows for audio to be recorded and monitored with very low latencies.
It is exciting to imagine the performance when PCIe 4.0 shows up and 10nm CPUs become optimised in a couple of years.
Old 9th November 2017
  #20
First off Presonus, huge props on this. I've been following new interfaces pretty close lately and looking for a smaller interface for mobile recording, that is still useful in the studio. 2 TB ports is awesome and not found in many mobile interfaces, and not even in many competitor's full rack interfaces.

2 sets of ADAT is amazing too, this can truly serve as a studio main interface, with more than enough IO ( at least for small-med size studio's).

Midi and SPDIF too!? Sweet.

Only 1 headphone jack!? ahhhh that's where you fall short. That's why I'm gonna give 4.9 instead of 5 stars.
Old 28th November 2017
  #21
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Presonus:

I tried to buy the S1 artist->Pro upgrade during Black Friday, ahead of my Quantum 2 purchase.
It wouldn’t let me, since I don’t have artist currently registered.

It got me thinking: regardless of Black Friday, it would be cool if Quantum owners/purchasers get a discount voucher to upgrade to pro.
Old 28th November 2017
  #22
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
Presonus:

I tried to buy the S1 artist->Pro upgrade during Black Friday, ahead of my Quantum 2 purchase.
It wouldn’t let me, since I don’t have artist currently registered.

It got me thinking: regardless of Black Friday, it would be cool if Quantum owners/purchasers get a discount voucher to upgrade to pro.
There is one for Quantum. Think they ask for 150USD.
Old 28th November 2017
  #23
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by lllubi View Post
There is one for Quantum. Think they ask for 150USD.
Cool, thanks!
Then here’s to hoping my upcoming Quantum 2 will come with one too!

I’ll be mainly using it with Pro Tools for now, since S1 is not ready to compete with PT for MY workflow (nor was Cubase, it and S1 both have that dumbed down SC routing, for example), but I am interested in composing in S1.
Just as soon as they get their multi touch implementation in order. Hint, look at Bitwig for cues...
As is, Pro Tools, which was NOT designed for multi touch is quicker to edit with using touch, than S1 is.
It feels as though multi touch support was slapped on for bragging rights, as opposed to really being thought out and implemented accordingly.
(Same goes for Windows 8.1)

That said. S1 “felt” better to me than Cubase did, during my trials. It feels younger, leaner, more ready for the future. Cubase is extremely powerful don’t get me wrong, especially with DTouch. It seems a little less light on its feet, so to speak.

As is, Pro Tools is the only DAW that I’ve tried that elegantly facilitates my rather advanced workflow and routing.

I will keep my eye on S1, Bitwig and Cubase though. They all have several very interesting things going for them!

/OT
Old 28th March 2018
  #24
Here for the gear
 

I'm really struggling to choose between this or the antelope discrete4??
Old 6th April 2018
  #25
Lives for gear
 
rockreid's Avatar
 

Any real world reviews in the Quantum 2 especially compred to the RME Babyface Pro? Similar price points but the Quantum 2 on paper appears to have better audio quality and latency specs. But how do these two actually sound in real world testing? I already have a Babyface Pro but would consider the switch if the latency and audio is noticeably better.
Old 18th April 2018
  #26
Has anyone used this with additional 16 ADAT IO? Curious how the clocking, latency, stability is... With the low RTL of the Quantum, this would almost make a good monitor controller with a 16 channel ADAT interface for conversion. Assuming the RTL on the ADAT would be low too, just a small additional bump...
Old 29th April 2018
  #27
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Just ordered mine, I'll be testing it in conjunction with my SSL Alpha link hooked up via smux at 96kHz.
I'll let you know how I get on and how I feel the converters and pres fare against my SSL and outboard pres.
Old 10th May 2018
  #28
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
So I spent last weekend tracking eight tracks on the Quantum 2 at 96kHz.
They way I got to record eight tracks in stead of four, was like this:

I had a Sytek 4 channel mic pre hooked up to an SSL Alpha link which was smuxed out to the Quantum 2's ADAT inputs.

I tried different ways of clocking and they all worked stably, I couldn't quickly tell the difference sonically, so I ended up leaving the Quantum as master and slaving the Alpha Link via WC.

They were long takes, typically 30 mins each, so they were a good test for sustained stability. I left the buffer at 64 samples and didn't take the chance to go to 32. I recorded in Studio One, with no plugins running.
Judging from how stable it was at 64 samples (which is fine with me in terms of latency) I'm quite hopeful it would be stable with 32 samples too.

Overal I was impressed with the unit sonically. I couldn't quickly tell the difference between the sytek (with burr browns, which is not a high end pre, but definitely one of my favourite pres) / Alpha link combination and the Quantum.
Not being able to tell the difference in clocking in different ways I also take as a positive thing.

Overall I'm impressed with the unit and its value.
It runs more stably at low buffers on my 2.8 quad mid 2014 MBP than my HD Native & Delta/Alpha link combination currently runs on my 2012 3.33 6-Core Mac Pro. I stress though, that on PT10 my HD Native system run stably at 64 buffer 96k too. There's a problem between PT and macOS in recent versions that have made performance at low buffers much worse. So HD Native is not to blame there.

Still, in my current reality, Quantum 2 outperforms my main studio rig.

I will be happy with it.
I just returned the current unit since it was a B-stock unit that had not been treated well by the previous owner. So I decided to send it back and order a new one in stead, since I only got €50 off on the B-stock. Not worth the risk.
The unit was not damaged, by the way, it's a sturdy box and it can take some abuse, to be sure.
But the thing was a bit smudgy and smelt of frying pan and the knobs had some grease stains on it. Considering how recently this box came out, I was rather amazed at how the previous owner managed to abuse that box in such a short time. He must've used it to run a podcast from a foodtruck or something....
Pretty weird.
So this was exceptional circumstances, in no way do I imply the Quantum is flimsy. Had I got a better deal on the B-stock quantum I would've cleaned it and taken the risk, but since it was only 50 bucks off I decided it wasn't worth it to run the small risk of future defects (caused by the greasy air it was exposed to) which wouldn't have been my fault but wouldn't have been covered by the warranty.
So... the hassle of sending something back and having to wait for ups to bring the new one. Ugh... And you think the store did the right thing and picked up the tab for that 50 bucks price difference? Hell no. Ugh.

+1 for PreSonus Quantum interfaces.
-1 for big German equipment stores.
Old 12th May 2018
  #29
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
So I spent last weekend tracking eight tracks on the Quantum 2 at 96kHz.
They way I got to record eight tracks in stead of four, was like this:

I had a Sytek 4 channel mic pre hooked up to an SSL Alpha link which was smuxed out to the Quantum 2's ADAT inputs.

I tried different ways of clocking and they all worked stably, I couldn't quickly tell the difference sonically, so I ended up leaving the Quantum as master and slaving the Alpha Link via WC.

They were long takes, typically 30 mins each, so they were a good test for sustained stability. I left the buffer at 64 samples and didn't take the chance to go to 32. I recorded in Studio One, with no plugins running.
Judging from how stable it was at 64 samples (which is fine with me in terms of latency) I'm quite hopeful it would be stable with 32 samples too.

Overal I was impressed with the unit sonically. I couldn't quickly tell the difference between the sytek (with burr browns, which is not a high end pre, but definitely one of my favourite pres) / Alpha link combination and the Quantum.
Not being able to tell the difference in clocking in different ways I also take as a positive thing.

Overall I'm impressed with the unit and its value.
It runs more stably at low buffers on my 2.8 quad mid 2014 MBP than my HD Native & Delta/Alpha link combination currently runs on my 2012 3.33 6-Core Mac Pro. I stress though, that on PT10 my HD Native system run stably at 64 buffer 96k too. There's a problem between PT and macOS in recent versions that have made performance at low buffers much worse. So HD Native is not to blame there.

Still, in my current reality, Quantum 2 outperforms my main studio rig.

I will be happy with it.
I just returned the current unit since it was a B-stock unit that had not been treated well by the previous owner. So I decided to send it back and order a new one in stead, since I only got €50 off on the B-stock. Not worth the risk.
The unit was not damaged, by the way, it's a sturdy box and it can take some abuse, to be sure.
But the thing was a bit smudgy and smelt of frying pan and the knobs had some grease stains on it. Considering how recently this box came out, I was rather amazed at how the previous owner managed to abuse that box in such a short time. He must've used it to run a podcast from a foodtruck or something....
Pretty weird.
So this was exceptional circumstances, in no way do I imply the Quantum is flimsy. Had I got a better deal on the B-stock quantum I would've cleaned it and taken the risk, but since it was only 50 bucks off I decided it wasn't worth it to run the small risk of future defects (caused by the greasy air it was exposed to) which wouldn't have been my fault but wouldn't have been covered by the warranty.
So... the hassle of sending something back and having to wait for ups to bring the new one. Ugh... And you think the store did the right thing and picked up the tab for that 50 bucks price difference? Hell no. Ugh.

+1 for PreSonus Quantum interfaces.
-1 for big German equipment stores.
Cool, good to know it's working out! Bummer about the peanut-butter fingers who had it before you! I'll prob pick one up to test out at some point. I just got a good deal on an Apollo Twin MKll to connect with my Apollo 8 so I'm good for a bit. It work's flawlessly. But, good to know there are more inexpensive options when it comes to TB devices that can daisy chain. Also quite inexpensive in the States with sales and open boxes... Good luck
Old 12th May 2018
  #30
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Yah!
My new one’s arriving in a few days.
I expect to (partly) record and produce a lot of good songs with that at our apoartement. I will expand and mix them in my Studio on HD Native.

I’m glad that I can now get a quality portable interface with 4 channels of pres, with similar latency to my HD native, that I can take with me and work anywhere.
I also expect to use it as a e-drum/VI interface for live performances.
Apart from Studio / location recording interface.

Such a handy and quality box, glad I didn’t go for a apolo twin or zoom earlier.
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