The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Slate Digital VRS8 Thunderbolt Interface - Now Available
Old 1st July 2019
  #841
Quote:
Originally Posted by jthomp85 View Post
I did try the VRS8 of a friend of mine on my hackintosh with a z370 pro wifi, and a Titan Ridge. No luck, all other TB interfaces that I have tried worked just fine on my build, besides a Presonus Quantum that I had for a few weeks.

What I didn't try is the PCI but the last thing that I heard a few months back is that there wasn't a driver ready
Check this thread out over at Tonymacx86: https://www.tonymacx86.com/threads/u...226705/page-23

Someone got a VRS8 to work on a hackintosh both via TB and PCIe. There's also a fix to get the Quantum working in the same thread.

Last edited by pitchbend; 2nd July 2019 at 06:00 PM.. Reason: spelling
Old 1st July 2019
  #842
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziko123 View Post
@ Steven Slate and owners of VRS8. After all these months of developments, optimisation and fixes, what are present RTL figures for Windows:

1)96Khz 32 Buffer
2)192Khz 32 Buffer
3)192 kHz 64 Buffer
4)192Khz 128 Buffer

VRS only supports up to 96k.

RTL is 2.1ms at 96/64 and 5ms at 44/64

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziko123 View Post
@ Steven Slate

Also how is stability of drivers while shifting from daw audio to windows audio/youtube .
You can switch from DAW to system audio without issue. However, since VRS uses ASIO driver on Windows you will not be able to change buffers in the DAW while audio is running on the web browser. But simply close the web browser and change the buffer in the DAW, then reopen the web browser.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziko123 View Post
@ Steven Slate

Secondly, since VRS8 will be using pcie slot, how is the cpu load difference between it and regular usb interfaces.
CPU load will be the same, just depends on what buffers you are running at.
Old 1st July 2019
  #843
Gear Nut
 

Whats RTL at 96/32 ?

All flagship and premium interfaces have 24 bit/192 Khz convertors. Be it prism, apollo,Clarett,Apogee etc. Then why VRS8 is having only 96Khz convertor ?


If cpu load and latency is same, whether using usb or pcie, then going for a pcie exapnsion card option, didn't add your cost ?
Old 1st July 2019
  #844
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziko123 View Post
Whats RTL at 96/32 ?
RTL for VRS8 at 96/48 is 1.1ms
Old 1st July 2019
  #845
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JameyZ View Post
RTL for VRS8 at 96/48 is 1.1ms
Does that mean 32 buffers isn't supported in windows version ?

I can't get 48 buffer size in Ableton 10.1 . Its 32/64/128 and like that.


More than this i am surprised by having only 96Khz convertor. All flagship and premium interfaces have 24 bit/192 Khz converters. Please explain why ?
Old 2nd July 2019
  #846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziko123 View Post
Does that mean 32 buffers isn't supported in windows version ?

I can't get 48 buffer size in Ableton 10.1 . Its 32/64/128 and like that.
DAWs offer the buffer size given by the driver. Your current interface offers 32/64/128, that is why you only see that.

Quote:
More than this i am surprised by having only 96Khz convertor. All flagship and premium interfaces have 24 bit/192 Khz converters. Please explain why ?
It is a design choice. Are you working at 192kHz? Do people use those 192kHz onboard sound chips in 192kHz?
In the 10 years I have been involved in building workstations for customers, I only had ONE customer sometimes using 192kHz. And maybe 1-2% working in 96k.
So hats off to Slate for not just following the 192kHz marketing blurp.
Old 2nd July 2019
  #847
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAW PLUS View Post
DAWs offer the buffer size given by the driver. Your current interface offers 32/64/128, that is why you only see that.

It is a design choice. Are you working at 192kHz? Do people use those 192kHz onboard sound chips in 192kHz?
In the 10 years I have been involved in building workstations for customers, I only had ONE customer sometimes using 192kHz. And maybe 1-2% working in 96k.
So hats off to Slate for not just following the 192kHz marketing blurp.

You may be right about driver given buffer size. As i just remembered one behringer interface had 48 buffer size.

About 192 Khz, do you mean to say all premium interfaces and converters like Prism, Apollo, Apogee,Clarett etc are they playing marketing blurp since years? 192 Khz is just marketing hype ?

About 192/96, this has to be option given like every converter..to let it the customer's suitability.

I record my vocals at 192, and i hear it better than 96Khz vocal takes. Latency wise its better too.. Plugins also sound better at 192Khz. Difference is noticeable when you use multiple analog emulation's saturation, distortions.
Thats why oversampling option VMR gives at 96Khz, isnt there in available when you track/mix at 192 Khz.

Now you will start a war.. can you hear difference between and 48khz and 96khz, 96 vs 192.. i can post you blind sessions etc etc.

If there isn't a difference, why did they even opt for 96Khz, when 44.1/48 Khz is the current standard for productions..! And human ears can't hear anything above that!

[

An accomplished and legend producer and mix engineer Al Schmitt uses 192 Khz for his recordings. As he hear better depth and width.

You can view above. Do you mean he is lying ?


With more powerful PC's handling it, in future people will start recording at 96 and 192 Khz..!
Just 2-3 years before everyone used to laugh about recording, mixing anything at above 44.1/48Khz. Neither plugins coded at those time(10 years before) were made for 192Khz. As processors weren't high powerful enough. Intel's efficient i7 got released 2011 onwards.

There were hassles, limitations making it not to use high/highest sample rates. As 44.1 sounded decent enough.
But with capable hardware and good plugins, people are shifting to 96Khz..

Some years before did you ever imagine anyone tracking,mix and mastering, switching microphones modules while at mix,
everything with plugins giving as good sound as analog gears. Nobody believed.

Now people all over internet are asking, comparing analog vs digital, and ratio is 50/50 !

What Slate Digital invented is revolutionary!


If 192 KHz highest sample rate A/D, D/A option is there, let it be that.
It isnt snatching anything away.
Give options. Those who want they can.
And its a 2000$ interface.
Old 2nd July 2019
  #848
I have made absolutely 0 comments about sound quality differences between 44/96/192kHz, and I happily stay out of that discussion. I said rarely anyone is using it - note that our customer base are 99% professionals, using audio workstations for a living. So, in the case of Slate, possibly having noted a similar scenario, they could have made the decision to put the money elsewhere instead of getting 192kHz.
I have no idea what their design choices & motivations are, I just give a possible scenario.
I don't think the lack of 192kHz support is going to make a significant revenue loss. And that is why I mentioned it as a marketing thing.
Old 3rd July 2019
  #849
Here for the gear
 

Will we see Windows drivers for Thunderbolt connectivity? It would be great to utilize more than one VRS8 per PC
Old 4th July 2019
  #850
Gear Nut
 

https://www.pro-tools-expert.com/hom...hz-sample-rate


An In-depth experiment at 192 kHz, and he too heard them. The mic models sounded more realistic, detailed with 3D depth. Read the findings at the end.
And that's are exact my finding too. Tracking at 192Khz sounds so natural, alive and every plugin sounds better, reverbs are deeper and clearer.

Really wish VRS8 to support 192Khz with an update(if possible).
Old 7th July 2019
  #851
Gear Maniac
 
cl-audio's Avatar
 

I've been mixing professionally for the last 30 years, the last 18 with ProTools.
I do about 250-300 mixes a year. All genres and styles. I've never, ever got a session or files at 192khz. About 3-10 sessions a year are 96khz, most are 48khz and about a quarter are 44.1khz...



Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziko123 View Post
https://www.pro-tools-expert.com/hom...hz-sample-rate


An In-depth experiment at 192 kHz, and he too heard them. The mic models sounded more realistic, detailed with 3D depth. Read the findings at the end.
And that's are exact my finding too. Tracking at 192Khz sounds so natural, alive and every plugin sounds better, reverbs are deeper and clearer.

Really wish VRS8 to support 192Khz with an update(if possible).
Old 7th July 2019
  #852
Slate Pro Audio / Slate Digital
 
Steven Slate's Avatar
 

Hi guys.

Much of the development of the VRS8 was revolved around the question “ how old the hell are we going to make this thing $2000 with all of this expensive crap in it?”.

And to be honest, we didn’t do all that well, since it’s a pretty low margin product because it is so expensive to produce.

However, if we designed it to do 192khz, it would not have made any difference for sample rates below that, it would’ve increased the cost, and I believe less than 5% of users would actually utilize that super high sample rate. Therefore the decision was made to at 96kHz, and I think it was a great decision.

Windows users, we do have one remaining bug that our team is tackling. It’s quite a rare bug, but as many know about me… I like things perfect. More news soon.

Steven
Old 7th July 2019
  #853
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Slate View Post
Hi guys.

Much of the development of the VRS8 was revolved around the question “ how old the hell are we going to make this thing $2000 with all of this expensive crap in it?”.

And to be honest, we didn’t do all that well, since it’s a pretty low margin product because it is so expensive to produce.

However, if we designed it to do 192khz, it would not have made any difference for sample rates below that, it would’ve increased the cost, and I believe less than 5% of users would actually utilize that super high sample rate. Therefore the decision was made to at 96kHz, and I think it was a great decision.

Windows users, we do have one remaining bug that our team is tackling. It’s quite a rare bug, but as many know about me… I like things perfect. More news soon.

Steven
But i love how my vocals sounds more alive and with depth during tracking at 192 Khz.

Does all of your plugins in VMR, VBC, Verbsuite,L Plate, FGX support 192Khz sample rate ?
Old 7th July 2019
  #854
Gear Addict
 
BadYodeler's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziko123 View Post
But i love how my vocals sounds more alive and with depth during tracking at 192 Khz. wworried
That wouldn’t even matter on a Celine Dion recording, you must be a world class singer kfhkh
Old 8th July 2019
  #855
Gear Nut
 

http://tiny.cc/9ddf9y

From the legend pros,

YOU RECORD AT 192 KHZ AT CAPITOL, IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR REASON FOR THIS?
It sounds better. You can really tell the difference, especially when you do jazz and orchestras where you have a lot of open space. It’s also about future-proofing, for example, if the record comes back around and they want to put out a high-res audio version, which happens quite a bit, we’re ready for it.

A lot of the plugins work a lot better at higher sample rates too such as Melodyne. I was amazed a couple of time of how far I could push stuff. I had a singer that sang a whole step flat. I just grabbed it, pushed it up and it worked. If that was at 44.1 kHz it wouldn’t have worked as well, if at all.

https://imge.to/i/IKADR

Old 21st July 2019
  #856
Here for the gear
 

Having trouble connecting the interfaces to my 2017 macbook running 10.14.5. Macbook isn't seeing the interfaces.

Followed all the directions and installed the drivers. I'm wondering if it's my thunderbolt cables that are the problem? They're not official apple cables, they're these:
https://www.amazon.com/Cable-Matters...gateway&sr=8-2

Already set up an appointment with slate support, but just wanted to see if anyone else has ran into this problem. Could having bootleg cables cause something like this to happen? For troubleshooting purposes I also tried connecting to another 2013 macbook and had the same issue.
Old 21st July 2019
  #857
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deco View Post
Having trouble connecting the interfaces to my 2017 macbook running 10.14.5. Macbook isn't seeing the interfaces.

Followed all the directions and installed the drivers. I'm wondering if it's my thunderbolt cables that are the problem? They're not official apple cables, they're these:
https://www.amazon.com/Cable-Matters...gateway&sr=8-2

Already set up an appointment with slate support, but just wanted to see if anyone else has ran into this problem. Could having bootleg cables cause something like this to happen? For troubleshooting purposes I also tried connecting to another 2013 macbook and had the same issue.
It's probable that the cable is simply DOA. I have Monoprice Thunderbolt cables and it works fine.
Old 22nd July 2019
  #858
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deco View Post
Having trouble connecting the interfaces to my 2017 macbook running 10.14.5. Macbook isn't seeing the interfaces.

Followed all the directions and installed the drivers. I'm wondering if it's my thunderbolt cables that are the problem? They're not official apple cables, they're these:
https://www.amazon.com/Cable-Matters...gateway&sr=8-2

Already set up an appointment with slate support, but just wanted to see if anyone else has ran into this problem. Could having bootleg cables cause something like this to happen? For troubleshooting purposes I also tried connecting to another 2013 macbook and had the same issue.

Please go to System Preferences → Security & Privacy. Under the "General" tab, please click "allow".



Now the driver has access.
Old 26th July 2019
  #859
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziko123 View Post
http://tiny.cc/9ddf9y

From the legend pros,

YOU RECORD AT 192 KHZ AT CAPITOL, IS THERE ANY PARTICULAR REASON FOR THIS?
It sounds better. You can really tell the difference, especially when you do jazz and orchestras where you have a lot of open space. It’s also about future-proofing, for example, if the record comes back around and they want to put out a high-res audio version, which happens quite a bit, we’re ready for it.

A lot of the plugins work a lot better at higher sample rates too such as Melodyne. I was amazed a couple of time of how far I could push stuff. I had a singer that sang a whole step flat. I just grabbed it, pushed it up and it worked. If that was at 44.1 kHz it wouldn’t have worked as well, if at all.

https://imge.to/i/IKADR

192k doesn't make as much of a difference as good converters. I bet the converters they were using when that article was written weren't as good as the VRS8 converters. In my entire mastering history (100s of records) I've gotten exactly 1 record at 192.

The whole system sounds so good, I almost think its too good. Like if it were more expensive, it might get more attention. But because it falls within reach of mid-fi stuff its people in that market looking into it.
Old 26th July 2019
  #860
Lives for gear
 

Eh? What he wrote makes total sense in terms of plugins that either have poor oversampling or none at all. Running at 192kHz can make some plugins, especially older plugins, sound much better (far larger difference than between modern AD/DA converters).

You are literally forcing the plugins to have at least 4x oversampling (compared to 48kHz) and due to the whole system running 192kHz you only have to do the downsampling of all the audio streams once. That is a real benefit.

The negative of this is that most clients deliver their audio stuff at either 44.1kHz or 48kHz (thankfully the latter is getting really common!!) which means you need to sample rate convert those audio files and that is a destructive process in itself.

Having said that, his example of Melodyne performing better is a bit strange.. but then again the program does technically have many more samples to play with to do it's thing. Perhaps it really is helping for that program too.
Old 27th July 2019
  #861
Gear Nut
 

@ thermos Sir, the interview is of Steve Genewick, 3 time Grammy nominated engineer and he works at Al Schmitt's Capitol studio. One of the world's famous recording and producing place, dream for every musician to record.
From Neve88RS to Fairchild 670, they have all these expensive equipment, why will they have mediocre convertors ?

His complete interview from where i quoted his reason for working at highest sample rate:
http://tiny.cc/8c0baz

You can listen to Al Schmitt directly how he finds difference between 192Khz and others.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1B9dprlnyw0


Now on your point, respectfully i really really don't know, if 96Khz on latest @ AK5578 chip converter(VRS 8) will sound better than Clarett/Apollo X8, X16' at 192 Khz.

Hope @ Steven Slate can give share insight if 96 Khz on using VRS8 will be better than 192 Khz of any else converter.

As precision of frequency response of converters gets precise with using higher sample rates.The higher the sample rate, the higher the maximum frequency that can be sampled (Nyquist Theorem).
Old 27th July 2019
  #862
Gear Nut
 

I am a big fan of Slate Digital, and i really wanted to get a VRS8, but everywhere i see, you gotta settle with some compromise.

I have ML-1, use windows and i want to track using VMR mic modules live, with least possible latency, rock stable drivers, best preamp & converters and at highest resolution.

Yes differences one can instantly hear when you track at 192 vs 96 Khz. There is much more depth, reverb sounds more natural, mic emulations sound more realistic and differences are much more audible when i track at 192 kHz.


Now coming to options,

A) Universal Apollo X16 --> Specs wise boasts the best, but again won't be able to use VMR mics during recording due to Console App limitation. Without Console, they have poor latency(higher than USB) even using TB3.

B) Apogee Symphony MK2--> Only for MAC

C)Audient--> Again poor latency.

Only Options:

D)Focusrite--> Only solution in Windows where they work flawlessly with lowest latency figures, but don't know how their converters sound against the VRS8 or premium one's .

E) Slate Digital VRS8--> Yes its for windows, perhaps lowest latency figure , best one can get in windows, and when they will have drivers out, it will be best RTL figure, i am sure. Best preamps for ML-1, and best converters,
but only at 96 kHz.


Die wish-- To get a custom made VRS 8 for me with 192 Khz sample rate support( i will pay for extra cost ) , or bring smaller 2/4 version with 192 KHz sample rate..
Old 27th July 2019
  #863
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziko123 View Post
@ thermos Sir, the interview is of Steve Genewick, 3 time Grammy nominated engineer and he works at Al Schmitt's Capitol studio. One of the world's famous recording and producing place, dream for every musician to record.
From Neve88RS to Fairchild 670, they have all these expensive equipment, why will they have mediocre convertors ?

His complete interview from where i quoted his reason for working at highest sample rate:
http://tiny.cc/8c0baz

You can listen to Al Schmitt directly how he finds difference between 192Khz and others.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1B9dprlnyw0


Now on your point, respectfully i really really don't know, if 96Khz on latest @ AK5578 chip converter(VRS 8) will sound better than Clarett/Apollo X8, X16' at 192 Khz.

Hope @ Steven Slate can give share insight if 96 Khz on using VRS8 will be better than 192 Khz of any else converter.

As precision of frequency response of converters gets precise with using higher sample rates.The higher the sample rate, the higher the maximum frequency that can be sampled (Nyquist Theorem).
Yeah I’ve recorded at capitol a bunch. Not in a few years but I seem to remember avid converters.
Here’s a white paper from Dan Lavry. http://www.lavryengineering.com/pdfs...lity_audio.pdf
Old 28th July 2019
  #864
Gear Maniac
 
cl-audio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziko123 View Post
E) Slate Digital VRS8--> Yes its for windows, perhaps lowest latency figure , best one can get in windows, and when they will have drivers out, it will be best RTL figure, i am sure. Best preamps for ML-1, and best converters,
but only at 96 kHz.


Die wish-- To get a custom made VRS 8 for me with 192 Khz sample rate support( i will pay for extra cost ) , or bring smaller 2/4 version with 192 KHz sample rate..
If max 96k sample rate stops you from making amazing sounding records, than you simply don't know what the **** you're doing (in my not so humble opinion)
Old 28th July 2019
  #865
Gear Nut
 

@ cl-audio Hello !

96 Khz Sample rate doesn't stop me or anyone. People still record on much cheaper and budget interfaces and microphones(Behringer C1) at 44.1 and 48 and are hit on youtube.

Lets not mingle mixing/producing abilities with core technicalities .

In 2-3 years people have shifted from 44.1-48-96 Khz. Because of benefits right ?
And 192 has benefits over 96 Khz. In near future 2-3 years, there is going to be even more shift towards high resolution production.

I record at 96 Khz and 192 Khz on my Clarett. I don't know if its possible that with the quality of clocks and converter, 96Khz on VRS8 may sound better than Clarett at 192 Khz.

If clocks and converter make much more difference like pulling a blanket off.

All the pricey mastering grade standalone converters, interfaces have 192 Khz sample rate support. They have given an option right ?

2019's launched interfaces like Antelope Orion HD+, Steinberg and others give an option for even 384/768 Khz support.

But since we mix in the box, all plugins including Slate Digital has upto 192 Khz support only. So anything above it isnt useful.

During recording Sample Rate makes a difference.

To everyone. Do it for yourself:

"Put on headphones, on a blank session, record a single vocal track at 192 Khz with least buffer your system can handle. Sing some lines or a voice over. Now change sample rate to lower 96/48 Khz and continue your singing, talking.. you will hear immediately.
To it add some Slate Mic Models, a bit compression and an aux reverb, you will hear the differences more profoundly like 3-D. Classtic Tubes emulation's details and differences are more like night and day!

192 will sound so more real and natural.

Please do once, come back and reply here.

And i am not alone.

Dan Cooper from Pro-Tools expert tested and found the exact same verdict. Read from himself.

https://www.pro-tools-expert.com/hom...hz-sample-rate


I am one of the biggest supporter of Slate Digital, but just sometimes i feel what if i could hear microphone and analog emulations at highest sample rate, it would have been sonically so awesome, more natural, true to its potential.
Old 28th July 2019
  #866
Here for the gear
 

Whether or not 192 is a night and day difference, I think you've made your point...
Old 4 weeks ago
  #867
Lives for gear
 

So, as there is no ML-2 thread, I'll post here.

After just a few months, my ML-2 began to be ultra noisy and unusable. I remember a video from youtube that presents the same problem in more than one of the ML-2 he bought.

Unfortunately, because of my location, Slate company will not replace my mic.

The worst part now: I just bought 2 more ML-2s a few weeks ago. So, I'm just expecting them to turn into an useless piece of metal now too.

There is clearly a QC problem with this mics.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #868
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SameOh View Post
So, as there is no ML-2 thread, I'll post here.

After just a few months, my ML-2 began to be ultra noisy and unusable..
Try reseating the capsule, simply unscrew and screw back on the capsule and that should fix your issues.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #869
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pitchbend View Post
Check this thread out over at Tonymacx86: https://www.tonymacx86.com/threads/u...226705/page-23

Someone got a VRS8 to work on a hackintosh both via TB and PCIe. There's also a fix to get the Quantum working in the same thread.
I did. It's been working flawlessly. Same fix can be applied to cheesegrater Mac Pro. The issue has to do with VT-d/VT-x virtualization environment. The driver asks for contiguous mem space typically reserved for kernel.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #870
Slate Pro Audio / Slate Digital
 
Steven Slate's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SameOh View Post
So, as there is no ML-2 thread, I'll post here.

After just a few months, my ML-2 began to be ultra noisy and unusable. I remember a video from youtube that presents the same problem in more than one of the ML-2 he bought.

Unfortunately, because of my location, Slate company will not replace my mic.

The worst part now: I just bought 2 more ML-2s a few weeks ago. So, I'm just expecting them to turn into an useless piece of metal now too.

There is clearly a QC problem with this mics.
Hi, if your microphone is only a few months old it is under warranty and it should be replaced unless you are in a country where we are legally incapable of sending stuff?

Cheers,
Steven
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