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
Steinberg announces UR-RT2 and UR-RT4 interfaces Audio Interfaces
Old 19th April 2018
  #31
Gear Addict
 
digitalson's Avatar
 

Yeah is expensive but it does come with Yamaha plugins,so might be worth it
Old 20th April 2018
  #32
Gear Addict
 
zohomoho's Avatar
 

I wonder if the line ins also hit the transformers.
Old 20th April 2018
  #33
Lives for gear
 
screentan's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zohomoho View Post
I wonder if the line ins also hit the transformers.
Good question. I'd like to know too.
Old 20th April 2018
  #34
Quote:
Originally Posted by zohomoho View Post
I wonder if the line ins also hit the transformers.
They do not.


Old 24th April 2018
  #35
Lives for gear
 
djshire's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalson View Post
Yeah is expensive but it does come with Yamaha plugins,so might be worth it
LOL

I'm in the market for a new interface, but I cannot justify that price tag. I already have plug-ins that can color the sound if I want, and if there is no other features beyond the transformers that differentiate this from their other interfaces, why would I get it?
Old 24th April 2018
  #36
Gear Nut
 
freezerman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by djshire View Post
LOL

I'm in the market for a new interface, but I cannot justify that price tag. I already have plug-ins that can color the sound if I want, and if there is no other features beyond the transformers that differentiate this from their other interfaces, why would I get it?
Have you ever used any Neve preamps? I understand that these will be Portico(ish). If this follows the same path as other RN collaborations some may likely consider it worth the price tag. It'll all be about those pre's IMO. A Portico pre amp costs about $800 per preamp. The preamp, comp, eq and gtr effects are all pre DAW.

It's a bit like my Apollo interface, the only reason I bought the 8p was because of the preamp section. Choice of Neve, UA and several others. All great emu's.

What I'd really like to know, is whether they are going to do the same with the 8 channel rack version. Still love the sound of the pre's in my old mr816csx and still going strong as an adat extension interface 10 years on.
Old 24th April 2018
  #37
Lives for gear
 
djshire's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by freezerman View Post
Have you ever used any Neve preamps? I understand that these will be Portico(ish). If this follows the same path as other RN collaborations some may likely consider it worth the price tag. It'll all be about those pre's IMO. A Portico pre amp costs about $800 per preamp. The preamp, comp, eq and gtr effects are all pre DAW.

It's a bit like my Apollo interface, the only reason I bought the 8p was because of the preamp section. Choice of Neve, UA and several others. All great emu's.

What I'd really like to know, is whether they are going to do the same with the 8 channel rack version. Still love the sound of the pre's in my old mr816csx and still going strong as an adat extension interface 10 years on.
I do very little external recording, so there's no point in me spending an extra $150 for nicer preamps....under the assumption that I got/was getting the UR242 (which I'm not).
Old 25th April 2018
  #38
Gear Nut
 
freezerman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by djshire View Post
I do very little external recording, so there's no point in me spending an extra $150 for nicer preamps....under the assumption that I got/was getting the UR242 (which I'm not).
All that noise and you've actually got no intentional skin in the game
Old 26th April 2018
  #39
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginaryday View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by zohomoho
I wonder if the line ins also hit the transformers.
They do not.
In the first video posted it's clearly stated that the front line-ins do run through the transformers.
Old 26th April 2018
  #40
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
In the first video posted it's clearly stated that the front line-ins do run through the transformers.
Dropbox - UR-RT2_UR-RT4.JPG
Old 26th April 2018
  #41
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginaryday View Post
Yes, and as you can see the front inputs #3 /4 have what seems to be a bypass switch ("on off" is weird) and function as combo XLR (mic) / 1/4 inch (line).

So, at least the line inputs on the front can be bypassed. Sorry if I misunderstood and you were discussing the rear inputs only.
Old 26th April 2018
  #42
Lives for gear
 
djshire's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by freezerman View Post
All that noise and you've actually got no intentional skin in the game
Old 26th April 2018
  #43
Gear Nut
 
freezerman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by djshire View Post
LOL, no thanks
Old 27th April 2018
  #44
Lives for gear
 
gsilbers's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by screentan View Post
Design background:

that was a very hard exercise to not say "neve preamp" and instead say "rupert neve preamps and consoles" , have a lot of neve looking products and neve nostalgia but say the pres on the UR are custom design for the unit.

so im a very dumb consumer and i only understood its a famous neve preamp on a very affordable interface. im sure i wont tell the difference between a neve and this on a blind shoot out but pres are very important.

i just hate this "marketing" stuff and get grouchy for some odd reason. im sure its a very good product regardless of that.
Old 27th April 2018
  #45
Does anyone think these might sound comparable to / better than Apogee, Focusrite, Apollo?
Old 27th April 2018
  #46
Lives for gear
 

I think they might...
Old 27th April 2018
  #47
The standard pres in UR series are pretty good IMO, not the best, but good. The transformers will jsut do that, add some colour to the clean signal.
Old 28th April 2018
  #48
Gear Nut
 
kasami08's Avatar
The digital conversation specs are horrible compared to the Focusrite Clarett USB range. I was expecting alot of headroom around 118 db and THD+N 0.0007% or less. With input transformers, I'm not sure how's that going to work out with a poor performing Analog to Digital front end at 102 dB. That's like my old Edirol UA-25EX that I use to own back in the day.

I really think Rupert Neve should have collaborated with Focusrite as it would of been nice to see him back doing something with a company he started that left his foot print. He hasn't designed any thing for Focusrite since he sold the company. That's what I want to see. It's still Mr. Neve's brand name even though Phil Dudderidge owns the new company.
Old 28th April 2018
  #49
Gear Nut
 
freezerman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kasami08 View Post
The digital conversation specs are horrible compared to the Focusrite Clarett USB range. I was expecting alot of headroom around 118 db and THD+N 0.0007% or less. With input transformers, I'm not sure how's that going to work out with a poor performing Analog to Digital front end at 102 dB. That's like my old Edirol UA-25EX that I use to own back in the day.

I really think Rupert Neve should have collaborated with Focusrite as it would of been nice to see him back doing something with a company he started that left his foot print. He hasn't designed any thing for Focusrite since he sold the company. That's what I want to see. It's still Mr. Neve's brand name even though Phil Dudderidge owns the new company.
The specs are not the whole story when it comes to pres/conversion etc. High end gear can have worse specs on paper but are sonically far superior. Until its released and we get some feedback of actual use, I'm remaining open.

Re specs though, Steiny's 8 channel rack unit specs are always higher, more in line with the Focusrite interface you quoted. Which interface was that by the way?
Old 28th April 2018
  #50
Gear Nut
 
kasami08's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by freezerman View Post
The specs are not the whole story when it comes to pres/conversion etc. High end gear can have worse specs on paper but are sonically far superior. Until its released and we get some feedback of actual use, I'm remaining open.

Re specs though, Steiny's 8 channel rack unit specs are always higher, more in line with the Focusrite interface you quoted. Which interface was that by the way?
The UR has always been more in line with the Scarlett range when it comes to the ADC front end that's more on the "prosumer" side. I can assure you those pres are going to be more noisey vs one with more headroom. It has a much higher noise floor to signal ratio. Once you start recording and stacking multiple tracks in a DAW, the noise floor increases. Dynamic Range is not so important on the DAC side if you are not running through outboard gear and looped back into a ADC. Most people are mixing in the box these days. Electronics generate noise resulting in a higher noise floor. Those Transformers need more headroom like the ISA Pre amp.


I also own three Focusrite interfaces myself, the 1st gen Scarlett 18i20, Forte USB and the Clarett 8 Pre Thunderbolt interface. I can definitely hear the difference between the three as the Forte and Clarett pres are significantly more quitter than the Scarlett. The Forte is technically derived from the Rednet range interfaces as they share the same digital remote control mic pre amps as the Rednet 4 and same digital conversation as the Rednet 2. The Clarett range is an entirely different design than the Scarlett range as it's more closely related to the the new Red interfaces because the Red 4 Pre continued on from the Clarett range as it's building block foundation sharing the same AIR mic pre amp design. Those two Thunderbolt interfaces puts the Scarlett range more in the lower end bracket since the Clarett and Red range are in a different league. Even my old Edirol UA-25EX was quite noisey with similar dynamic range as the Scarlett and UR but my Scarlett was not as bad.
Old 28th April 2018
  #51
Quote:
Originally Posted by kasami08 View Post
The digital conversation specs are horrible compared to the Focusrite Clarett USB range. I was expecting alot of headroom around 118 db and THD+N 0.0007% or less. With input transformers, I'm not sure how's that going to work out with a poor performing Analog to Digital front end at 102 dB. That's like my old Edirol UA-25EX that I use to own back in the day.
Specs are nothing. Listen to the same source recorded with and Audient iD22 and with a Prism Lyra and you will start questioning lot of things
Old 28th April 2018
  #52
Gear Nut
 
kasami08's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by heraldo_jones View Post
Specs are nothing. Listen to the same source recorded with and Audient iD22 and with a Prism Lyra and you will start questioning lot of things
Did you not read my comment about "Noise Floor"? The white noise will increase as you stack tracks which is why having a higher signal to noise ratio and lower noise distortion is very important on the front end. It's just as the same for the DAC if you are running it through outboard gear that creates alot of noise.
Old 28th April 2018
  #53
Quote:
Originally Posted by kasami08 View Post
Did you not read my comment about "Noise Floor"? The white noise will increase as you stack tracks which why having a higher signal to noise ratio and lower noise distortion is very important.
Lot of tools to eliminate or reduce noise floor without or barely affecting the track to care about it nowadays, at least IMO.
Old 28th April 2018
  #54
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kasami08 View Post
Did you not read my comment about "Noise Floor"? The white noise will increase as you stack tracks which is why having a higher signal to noise ratio and lower noise distortion is very important on the front end. It's just as the same for the DAC if you are running it through outboard gear that creates alot of noise.
Ok, but if you're recording at 24 bits, how far down is the noise floor going to be compared 0dBFS?

Once you've stacked all those tracks what is the loudness going to be of the music (or other) that you're mixing, and how far below that is your noise going to be?
Old 28th April 2018
  #55
Gear Nut
 
kasami08's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
Ok, but if you're recording at 24 bits, how far down is the noise floor going to be compared 0dBFS?

Once you've stacked all those tracks what is the loudness going to be of the music (or other) that you're mixing, and how far below that is your noise going to be?
That all depends on the required conditions and the signal. SNR is determined by the tested signal, the gain setting, frequency and room acoustics.

The UR-RT are still using the same ak5359 chip for it's ADC that's spec'd at 102 dB SNR found in the UR-44.

As Apogee said, the noise floor accumulates by track count while mixing which is why they said it's idea to start with more headroom. Simply record one track in your DAW and copy that same track 17 times and watch the noise floor grow during play back something like -76 dbv as an example. Processing a signal through effects also makes the noise floor louder.

What are THD+N and dynamic range? - Apogee Electronics

The Maximum input for the mic pre amp is only +4 dBu which is not alot of headroom for a micophone pre amp. That means you have to crank the gain up very high meaning increased noise floor of the pre amps. It's idea to have plenty enough input gain to capture a signal without adding noise to it. A weak signal going in adds more noise than a stronger signal without adding much gain. The Signal to Noise ratio plays a big role of capturing the quietest to even the loudest sound without clipping and distortion. The Clarett 8 Pre as an example has a maximum input gain of 18+ dBu. It can handle quiter signals meaning less noise in the signal than the Scarlett that only had a maximum mic input gain of +8 dBu. Some of the Motu and RME interfaces have a maximum gain input of +24 dBu.

The UR interfaces with them exception of the UR824 model lean more on the budget prosumer side in the same league as the Scarlett range. I'm just curious how are those Transformers going to sound on a low end spec interface. It may be subtle change in color, or a gimmick. I just think the transformers should have been implemented on a mid grade interface like the Clarett USB and Presonus Studio 192. I'm surprised that Yamaha hasn't developed a Thunderbolt interface yet like the rest of the market is going. It's like they are lagging behind In the competition.
Old 28th April 2018
  #56
I like noise
Old 28th April 2018
  #57
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kasami08 View Post
As Apogee said, the noise floor accumulates by track count while mixing which is why they said it's idea to start with more headroom. Simply record one track in your DAW and copy that same track 17 times and watch the noise floor grow durning play back. Processing a signal through effects also makes the noise floor louder.
That's actually debatable though since a copy/paste = exact copies. As far as I understand it if you recorded just noise and did that 20 times and that noise was different every time because the recordings were different then the overall noise level would be 13dB higher. So if the actual noise floor is about 100dB down then you'd be looking at noise 87dB down instead. With the same coherent source it's different.

So since the signal we actually care about is going to be a fair bit above that, i.e. the instrument we're recording, I don't really see how big a problem this will be. Sure, the noise will be there for sure, but how bad is it? How many recorded tracks do you need for that noise to be audible and not masked by the instruments that actually make up the music you are paying attention to?

And I'm not saying that a lower noise floor isn't better, I'm just saying that I'm not sure at what point this particular noise floor becomes an issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kasami08 View Post
The Maximum input for the mic pre amp is only +4 dBu which is not alot of headroom for a micophone pre amp. That means you have to crank the gain up very high meaning increased noise floor of the pre amps. It's idea to have plenty enough input gain to capture a signal without adding noise to it. A weak signal going in adds more noise than a stronger signal without adding much gain.
I don't think you're looking at that the right way though. +4dBu is surely far, far higher than what a mic puts out. Inputs 1/2 which are the ones we are talking about have that +4dBu ceiling, but it is a ceiling and the mics aren't going to get close to it.

For giggles I checked out a few Sennheiser mics. First of all their SNR range from 70dB to 86dB, i.e. worse than this interface. Secondly, sensitivity means they'll output only 2 to 35 MILLIvolts when the input is 94dB SPL. FAR below +4dBu.

In other words, the maximum input level for the mic inputs is pretty much irrelevant if the input signal is so far below the maximum. It could have been +20dBu and it wouldn't have made a difference; the input level would still have been the exact same and required the exact same level of gain applied to it.

It seems to me that if the mics provide their own noise some 80dB below the signal you're capturing then how much does the noise from the AD process really matter? Unless I'm thinking about this completely wrong it would seem like you'd get AD noise a good 20dB or so below the noise of the mic. Perhaps I'm missing something....???

Now, I do agree that if you're running a line level signal into inputs 1/2 there's perhaps a case to be made for the noise being too high. Fortunately there are four more inputs to use for that purpose, all four of which having better SNR than the Clarett!

Quote:
Originally Posted by kasami08 View Post
I'm just curious how are those Transformers going to sound on a low end spec interface. It may be subtle change in color, or a gimmick. I just think the transformers should have been implemented on a mid grade interface like the Clarett USB and Presonus Studio 192. I'm surprised that Yamaha hasn't developed a Thunderbolt interface yet like the rest of the market is going. It's like they are lagging behind In the competition.
My hunch is that Yamaha and Steinberg are probably knowing what they're doing. They've moved slowly in the market place for at least a decade, and they're still making money. Some other businesses had some superficially more compelling products but couldn't make enough to remain sustainable.
Old 29th April 2018
  #58
Gear Nut
 
freezerman's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
That's actually debatable though since a copy/paste = exact copies. As far as I understand it if you recorded just noise and did that 20 times and that noise was different every time because the recordings were different then the overall noise level would be 13dB higher. So if the actual noise floor is about 100dB down then you'd be looking at noise 87dB down instead. With the same coherent source it's different.

So since the signal we actually care about is going to be a fair bit above that, i.e. the instrument we're recording, I don't really see how big a problem this will be. Sure, the noise will be there for sure, but how bad is it? How many recorded tracks do you need for that noise to be audible and not masked by the instruments that actually make up the music you are paying attention to?

And I'm not saying that a lower noise floor isn't better, I'm just saying that I'm not sure at what point this particular noise floor becomes an issue.



I don't think you're looking at that the right way though. +4dBu is surely far, far higher than what a mic puts out. Inputs 1/2 which are the ones we are talking about have that +4dBu ceiling, but it is a ceiling and the mics aren't going to get close to it.

For giggles I checked out a few Sennheiser mics. First of all their SNR range from 70dB to 86dB, i.e. worse than this interface. Secondly, sensitivity means they'll output only 2 to 35 MILLIvolts when the input is 94dB SPL. FAR below +4dBu.

In other words, the maximum input level for the mic inputs is pretty much irrelevant if the input signal is so far below the maximum. It could have been +20dBu and it wouldn't have made a difference; the input level would still have been the exact same and required the exact same level of gain applied to it.

It seems to me that if the mics provide their own noise some 80dB below the signal you're capturing then how much does the noise from the AD process really matter? Unless I'm thinking about this completely wrong it would seem like you'd get AD noise a good 20dB or so below the noise of the mic. Perhaps I'm missing something....???

Now, I do agree that if you're running a line level signal into inputs 1/2 there's perhaps a case to be made for the noise being too high. Fortunately there are four more inputs to use for that purpose, all four of which having better SNR than the Clarett!



My hunch is that Yamaha and Steinberg are probably knowing what they're doing. They've moved slowly in the market place for at least a decade, and they're still making money. Some other businesses had some superficially more compelling products but couldn't make enough to remain sustainable.
mattiasnyc rather nails it here but I have to say we're talking about a limited channel interface that's likely being used for simple stuff, not 200+ channels of recording, where even a 10db difference at around -100dbA will make little to no perceivable difference. Great records were made on gear with much higher higher noise floors in the past. That's why, at this level or any other, I'm more interested in the 'nature/sound' of the pre's.
Old 29th April 2018
  #59
Gear Nut
 
kasami08's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
That's actually debatable though since a copy/paste = exact copies. As far as I understand it if you recorded just noise and did that 20 times and that noise was different every time because the recordings were different then the overall noise level would be 13dB higher. So if the actual noise floor is about 100dB down then you'd be looking at noise 87dB down instead. With the same coherent source it's different.

So since the signal we actually care about is going to be a fair bit above that, i.e. the instrument we're recording, I don't really see how big a problem this will be. Sure, the noise will be there for sure, but how bad is it? How many recorded tracks do you need for that noise to be audible and not masked by the instruments that actually make up the music you are paying attention to?

And I'm not saying that a lower noise floor isn't better, I'm just saying that I'm not sure at what point this particular noise floor becomes an issue.



I don't think you're looking at that the right way though. +4dBu is surely far, far higher than what a mic puts out. Inputs 1/2 which are the ones we are talking about have that +4dBu ceiling, but it is a ceiling and the mics aren't going to get close to it.

For giggles I checked out a few Sennheiser mics. First of all their SNR range from 70dB to 86dB, i.e. worse than this interface. Secondly, sensitivity means they'll output only 2 to 35 MILLIvolts when the input is 94dB SPL. FAR below +4dBu.

In other words, the maximum input level for the mic inputs is pretty much irrelevant if the input signal is so far below the maximum. It could have been +20dBu and it wouldn't have made a difference; the input level would still have been the exact same and required the exact same level of gain applied to it.

It seems to me that if the mics provide their own noise some 80dB below the signal you're capturing then how much does the noise from the AD process really matter? Unless I'm thinking about this completely wrong it would seem like you'd get AD noise a good 20dB or so below the noise of the mic. Perhaps I'm missing something....???

Now, I do agree that if you're running a line level signal into inputs 1/2 there's perhaps a case to be made for the noise being too high. Fortunately there are four more inputs to use for that purpose, all four of which having better SNR than the Clarett!



My hunch is that Yamaha and Steinberg are probably knowing what they're doing. They've moved slowly in the market place for at least a decade, and they're still making money. Some other businesses had some superficially more compelling products but couldn't make enough to remain sustainable.




Hmm, Not all microphones are equal. What if someone wanted to buy a Nuemann TLM 102 to use with this UR-RT4 interface? That's going to require at least a maximum input level of +14dbu of head room. There's a reason why many higher end audio interfaces have a lot of headroom beyond +4dbu. The Focusrite Clarett 4 Pre USB can handle the TLM 102 without overloading the preamp with +18bu of headroom. For the same price overall, I still think the Focusrite Clarett and Audient ID22 blows this thing out of the water in terms of performance and headroom as it has specs closer to high end equipment that cost 2 to three times its price. The more headroom, the less noise, less distortion, quieter pres. Of course you can record as many as tracks as you want with any interface as it doesn't matter how many pre's an interface has. The difference between both my Forte and Scarlett was night and day. The difference between my Forte and Clarett not so much because they're very much on par in terms of digital conversion and headroom. The Edirol UA-25EX was a piece of junk, that didn't have much headroom as the pres were very noisy and you start clipping very easily which is expected with low budget interfaces. Specification does mean a lot especially when it comes to the mic pre amps. Selecting Mic Preamps


Neumann TLM 102

11 Mv/Pa

144 dB

Maximum output voltage 13 dBu
Old 29th April 2018
  #60
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kasami08 View Post
Hmm, Not all microphones are equal. What if someone wanted to buy a Nuemann TLM 102 to use with this UR-RT4 interface? That's going to require at least a maximum input level of +14dbu of head room. There's a reason why many higher end audio interfaces have a lot of headroom beyond +4dbu.
I understand that different mics have different maximum output levels. But it's also due to different sensitivity levels. The TLM 102 outputting even just +4dBu would see an SPL of 134dB. That's threshold of pain-level. At +14dBu it's seeing an SPL of around 146dB, which is like standing close to a jet.


source

The other thing is that it is a pre amplifier, so we do expect to amplify the signal. Since this "maximum input level" seems to refer to what goes into inputs 1/2 we still aim to increase the level using the preamp. If we don't need to do that then we don't need the preamp to begin with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kasami08 View Post
For the same price overall, I still think the Focusrite Clarett blows this thing out of the water in terms of performance and headroom as it has specs closer to high end equipment that cost 2 to three times its price. The more headroom, the less noise, less distortion, quieter pres.
But isn't the above true only if you blow past the specs though? The specs refer to a range within which distortion (for example) is minimal. If it says that the maximum input level is +4dBu then the point is that it distorts beyond that point. +4dBu is the onset of distortion. If you're below that value then you're not getting "less distortion" with the Clarett; because neither is distorting.

If there still is a difference then a different measurement would show that.

PS: I'm not saying the Clarett isn't an overall better buy, or that a higher maximum arguably wouldn't be better, just that I'm reading or interpreting this differently than you.

I think it'll be easy enough to see if this is a good investment once people start buying it and using it.
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