The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
PreSonus Expands Thunderbolt Interface Line with Quantum 2626
Old 15th March 2020
  #91
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
All Quantum interfaces are like that, since they omit the extra DSP or FPGA required for standalone operation, in order save cost and latency.
Old 15th March 2020
  #92
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by pangea2003 View Post
conversion and clocking can be a real issue sometimes
there will be a tiny added latency cascading units via adat
as well as experiencing jitter and syncing drop outs from time to time depending on the quality of the clocking between different brands/units
i much prefer to have all my pres and converters within a single unit/ecosystem
however, i also like the analog splitting option of some pre's like the presonus and audient asp series, which provide great quality/price and expandability options
Yeah, I doubt I will notice much of any of that but the fact that the risks with ADAT stability will be in the back of my limited mind I think I have decided to just stick 100% in Quantum space (ha) and expand my Q2 with a 2626 unless I can get a Q original used for around the same price.

I dig the rear mounted I/O and metering of Q but also dig the price and FX loop of the Q2626. The XMAX pres and the conversion seem to be the same caliber by the specs, I haven't heard anything convincing otherwise.

decisions decisions...
Old 21st March 2020
  #93
Here for the gear
 
hi-d-ho-man's Avatar
 

Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akivilkman View Post
If it matters to any of you, Quantum 2626 requires connection to computer and continuously running DAW to function. I was hoping that I could use it in my home studio, where I have no space for a separate mixer but no dice. Also figuring this out, I found out their customer support being highly incompetent. The search continues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~ufo~ View Post
All Quantum interfaces are like that, since they omit the extra DSP or FPGA required for standalone operation, in order save cost and latency.
Does this mean that there is NO input/output unless a daw is running. It can’t function as a primary soundcard? Is there something Quantum users do as a workaround?

I have one on the way, wondering if I made a mistake...

Thanks
Old 21st March 2020
  #94
Here for the gear
 

Yes, that's exactly what it means. I had to send mine back due to this.
Old 21st March 2020
  #95
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Well, it doesn’t necessarily have to be a DAW, but it needs to be running some sort of program acting as a mixer in order to have input monitoring.

I’ve never had an interface that did standalone operation.
I can see how it’s handy but I don’t miss it.
I don’t mind firing up a DAW or mixer app.
Old 22nd March 2020
  #96
Here for the gear
 

I'm bit of an analog guy, and like to keep computers and music separate from each other for as long as possible. If I would have space for mixer in my home setup, I probably wouldn't mind. As I don't, lacking standalone operation is a dealbreaker. It also means that the units will end up as electric waste as soon as the driver updates stop coming.

Sub 100 € interfaces have this functionality, so it shouldn't really be a question of money at this price point.
Old 22nd March 2020
  #97
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
It is not a money issue.
At least, not in the way you suggest.

They decided that they would invest their money in the best sounding and lowest latency path they could make.
Using an FPGA or a DSP to facilitate this standalone operation you refer to usually causes an increase in latency.
It also facilitates hardware monitoring, which the Quantum also doesn’t offer.
Its latency should be low enough to not need it.

Now they could’ve split the path and incorporated the hardware and software to allow for what you want but that would’ve driven its street price up considerably.

My Quantum 2 has better latency than my much pricier HD Native system and might sound better than the alpha links I use with that system.
Even-though HD Native has a little higher latency than Quantum has, I hardly ever need to use its hardware monitoring capability.

I’m personally not going to miss it with Quantum either. In the rare occasion I need to record far into the mix, ill just freeze my busses, make their tracks inactive and record. It takes little longer to set up than hardware monitoring does.

When drivers of an interface stop being updated, it doesn’t mean the interface is now junk. It means you can use it until it breaks, just probably not update the OS.

I can totally get your workflow requires standalone operation and that’s fine, but it is not a shortcoming of this interface that it doesn’t. It is by design.
Just get another interface.

Most pro interfaces I’ve used don’t have standalone operation.

Standalone is the exception not the rule, in my experience.
Old 25th March 2020
  #98
Here for the gear
 

Does anyone know if there's a good workaround for routing system audio to monitors through the Quantum(s), without an active DAW?

Other than that limitation, these seem like the right interfaces for me, but I'd really want to have the option to use my monitors for general music listening.
Old 25th March 2020
  #99
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by WildIsTheWind View Post
Does anyone know if there's a good workaround for routing system audio to monitors through the Quantum(s), without an active DAW?

Other than that limitation, these seem like the right interfaces for me, but I'd really want to have the option to use my monitors for general music listening.
I'm assuming I understand the question... For general music listening, on a Mac, go under System Preferences, Sound, Output and click on Quantum 2626.
Old 26th March 2020
  #100
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loud Noize Ent. View Post
I'm assuming I understand the question... For general music listening, on a Mac, go under System Preferences, Sound, Output and click on Quantum 2626.
On my Mac the output switches to quantum as soon as it connects. Working from home over last couple weeks I have been using it this way every day, with quick lil jams in between accomplished tasks.
Old 26th March 2020
  #101
Here for the gear
 

Maybe I misunderstood what people were saying before. I was responding to:

Quote:
Originally Posted by hi-d-ho-man View Post
Does this mean that there is NO input/output unless a daw is running. It can’t function as a primary soundcard?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akivilkman View Post
Yes, that's exactly what it means.
So a computer can use the Quantum's DAC to play system audio? (I'm on a PC, btw, though it shouldn't matter for this.)
Old 26th March 2020
  #102
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Of course it can.
Old 26th March 2020
  #103
Here for the gear
 

Okay, thanks. I assumed so, but it seemed like that's what the earlier posts were suggesting. If that's not what they meant, what limitation are they referring to there?
Old 26th March 2020
  #104
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildIsTheWind View Post
Okay, thanks. I assumed so, but it seemed like that's what the earlier posts were suggesting. If that's not what they meant, what limitation are they referring to there?
Possibly that it must be tethered to a computer. I use as a DAC for my computer every day to listen to Spotify, YouTube, Netflix...
Old 26th March 2020
  #105
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
Some interfaces can function stand alone, without the connected computer powered on or even connected.
They then effectively work as a simple digital mixer.

This can be handy if you just want to play and not record.

I’ve never really missed that functionality, perhaps because I have a recording studio, but also because usually as soon as I start playing, I get ideas that I want to record.

So I think I actually prefer having my DAW fired up when I jam.
I even do it for rehearsals. Everything’s miced up as standard in my studio. So if we’ve got a particularly good flow going, we can hit record at any time.

That’s also the beauty of a low latency interface. You can listen to DAW returns as you play and after you record, play back the same mix.
It’s greatly simplified over having to do separate cue mixes over a low latency monitoring path.
Of course, if you want to do separate low latency monitor mixes and playback mixes on an interface like quantum, you could do that. But you’re not forced to because the DAW return path is often not low latency enough to make that doable.
Like is the case with some Apollo interfaces, for example.

They both have their pros and cons.
What works best for you may differ from what works best for me.
Old 1st April 2020
  #106
Here for the gear
 
hi-d-ho-man's Avatar
 

I have an Art line mixer with 8 stereo inputs. I suppose I can add those to a patchbay and patch as needed when not using a DAW or similar. My unit came in last week, I’m not ready to bother with the rewiring yet. Maybe this weekend

Last edited by hi-d-ho-man; 4th April 2020 at 05:55 PM..
Old 2nd April 2020
  #107
Lives for gear
 

I can't find this in stock anywhere!
Old 4th April 2020
  #108
Here for the gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Primativ View Post
I can't find this in stock anywhere!
It is definitely selling out everywhere really quickly. I bought one but am having second thoughts now...
Old 4th April 2020
  #109
Lives for gear
 
Jim Rosebrook's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Primativ View Post
I can't find this in stock anywhere!
Get used to this... could become the norm for many products.
Old 4th April 2020
  #110
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRuckk View Post
It is definitely selling out everywhere really quickly. I bought one but am having second thoughts now...


May I ask why second thoughts?
Old 4th April 2020
  #111
Here for the gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Primativ View Post
May I ask why second thoughts?
Simply for some of the same reasons as a couple of other users mentioned earlier in the forum: Now I am a drummer, so an interface with 8 preamps suits my situation perfectly. So I plugged up several dynamic and condenser microphones to the Quantum 2626, just testing it out... plugged some headphones in and got absolutely no signal. The meters were lighting up on the various channels but I couldn't monitor what I was hearing until I launched a DAW and enabled input monitoring. I am not used to that type of workflow and have never owned an interface (that wasn't bus powered) that basically REQUIRED the use of a computer. Kind of a bummer when I can just plug my MOTU M4 up and do this with ease when it's only like a sub $200 interface. Why do I have to have Logic Pro or StudioOne open just to jam out? It boggles my mind.

I've been leaning towards the Arturia AudioFuse 8Pre. Although the same low latency isn't there because it's only USB-C, the preamps and all the other features seem to make this thing out to be a beast.
Old 4th April 2020
  #112
Lives for gear
Does anyone know if the front preamps on the quantum 2 can except a line signal? Like from an external preamp?

The manual says the two front preamps on the quantum 2 are not switching and are mic/instrument. I don’t quite understand that, but I would like to run two external preamp’s into those front Preamps. I’m already using the line inputs on the back. If not, I’ll buy some kind of ADAT device with line/mic inputs

Thanks
Old 4th April 2020
  #113
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
I’ve seen several posters complain about the fact that with this interface you need to launch software to get a signal on the outputs.
Now, it is perfectly valid to want stand alone operation and it’s perfectly valid if you think it’s a dealbreaker if an interface doesn’t offer this functionality.
I would however remind people that it’s called an interface because it interfaces WITH YOUR COMPUTER.
It is normal that an interface requires your computer to function.
There are interfaces that support stand alone operation, at which point they are effectively acting as a digital mixer, not a computer audio interface.
This is a plus and a design choice. Like most choices it has advantages and disadvantages.
It’s fine if you return your quantum interfaces but it here’s nothing wrong with them. They do what they say they do on the tin.
You assumed it had a function that it doesn’t. Again, it is not normal for a professional audio interface to support stand alone operation.

My PT HD Native rig doesn’t, not did my TDM before it.
Some cheaper interfaces have a simple analogue hardware monitoring function, but that’s not intended to jam with (of course you can if you want to).
They are simply a workaround to deal with their horrible latency.

So Sure, go buy an interface that can act as a standalone digital interface.
It is not bull**** that Quantum doesn’t offer that, is all I’m saying.
Old 4th April 2020
  #114
Here for the gear
Well I never claimed there to be anything wrong with interface itself. I just simply have never personally used one that didn't offer that function. I also didn't realize that many professional grade interfaces didn't support analog hardware monitoring as a default function, so thank you for opening my eyes to that. It is just a new experience for me in terms of hardware functionality... nothing I can't get used to. You made a great point about different manufacturers and brands including the analog function as a means to justify poor latency. Definitely agree there. Just now getting into larger and more pro-level interfaces so thanks for shedding some light and expanding my knowledge a little bit further on this
Old 4th April 2020
  #115
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
It’s definitely a ‘gotcha’ if you’re expecting it.
Wat I learned decades ago is that the more high end you go, often the fewer functions you get for your money.
In order to increase the quality of functions, the quantity often decreases.
I also think higher end stuff suffers more not being as mass produced.

Of course, this isn’t a high end interface we’re talking about.
But it’s one of the lowest latency interfaces in the planet.
With Quantum they decided to make the best quality lowest possible interface they could make but still quite affordable.
Omitting the hardware to enable low latency monitoring obviously helped to keep the cost down and it probably shaved some latency off too.
The idea then is that with a modern computer and such a low latency interface, the user won’t need a low latency monitoring function for recording because the daw returns are low latency enough.
This is mostly valid for their argument, but indeed an added downside is that there’s no stand alone operation possible.
Maybe their blue line of interfaces does support it. Dunno.
Old 5th April 2020
  #116
Gear Maniac
 

Does anyone know how the converters on the 2626, compare to those of the Audient iD44? I just want an interface at this price range, with the best sound and I keep reading that the iD44 sounds amazing. Thanks!
Old 5th April 2020
  #117
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loud Noize Ent. View Post
Does anyone know how the converters on the 2626, compare to those of the Audient iD44? I just want an interface at this price range, with the best sound and I keep reading that the iD44 sounds amazing. Thanks!
I had the iD14 and it was good, I prefer Quantum in sound by a little and latency by ALLOT. Audient latency was terrible in comparison. The only interface preamps I’ve experienced that nudge the Quantum are in the Antelope Discrete but that box was a buggy disaster, and the Quantum is so fast and stable I can use great plugs in my DAW to the same effect as the Antelope FPGA but with out noticeable limitations.
Old 5th April 2020
  #118
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loud Noize Ent. View Post
Does anyone know how the converters on the 2626, compare to those of the Audient iD44? I just want an interface at this price range, with the best sound and I keep reading that the iD44 sounds amazing. Thanks!
Not sure what the Audient uses for ADC and DAC stages other than they highly tout their preference to use separate ones:

What Is Dual Converter Technology?

The Presonus Quantum similarly uses separate DACs (AKM Semiconductor AK4413) and ADCs (AKM Semiconductor AK5574) on their Quantum line, coupled with their high-voltage discrete XMAX preamps.

Pro Tools Expert did a shootout between a Quantum and an Apogee Ensemble, and in their testing and responses, the Quantum edged out the Apogee:

Shoot Out Between Apogee Ensemble And PreSonus Quantum Thunderbolt Audio Interfaces
Old 5th April 2020
  #119
Gear Maniac
 

@ Esla Thanks for the info. Appreciate it. I don't record any live bands and the usage will simply be 1 virtual instrument recording at a time. At this point, will latency still be an issue?
@ Cpl. Punishment Great info as well, thanks. Are you sure the 2626 uses the same AKM DAC & ADC chips as the other Quantum's, that are 2 or 3 times the price? I'm not finding any info anywhere.
Old 6th April 2020
  #120
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loud Noize Ent. View Post
@ Cpl. Punishment Great info as well, thanks. Are you sure the 2626 uses the same AKM DAC & ADC chips as the other Quantum's, that are 2 or 3 times the price? I'm not finding any info anywhere.
Pretty sure. I can't remember exactly where, but I read they're using the same internal ADC/DAC/Preamp structure but eliminating the monitoring and remote control, so less processing and silicon inside. Also, Intel contributed the Thunderbolt3 specifications to the USB Developers' Group without royalties and USB4 will be based on TB technology (among other things), so it's possible this is one of the devices that isn't paying outlandish royalties on their TB connector like they would to Apple over TB2 on a mini-displayport.

Although putting the power switch on the back...
📝 Reply
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…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
♾️ Similar Threads
🎙️ View mentioned gear