The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
PreSonus Expands Thunderbolt Interface Line with Quantum 2626
Old 6th April 2020
  #121
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpl. Punishment View Post
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...
Thanks again, Cpl. Punishment and great TB technology info. I reached out to Presonus earlier on so they may shed a little light. If they respond back, I'll add it to this thread. It seems the 2626 and the iD44 are both very good units and it's just a matter of preference.
Old 6th April 2020
  #122
Gear Maniac
Wondering that if I stack quantum unit(daisy chain), am I able to use 4 headphone individual mixes(cue mix using their mixer app)? (Or even more using external 4ch headphone amp?)
Haven’t used presonus stuff but I like studio one, and wondering what if I ditch all uad stuff and go with quantum(need 8-16input total, will use external mic preamp) but uad’s mixer is easy to use, and I don’t need rme’s total mix’s complexity(even though it’s awesome!).
If anyone using quantum to track band’s live with 4-6 cue mixes, please chime in
Old 6th April 2020
  #123
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loud Noize Ent. View Post
@ 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.
Something may have been lost in communication but if your only recording 1 virtual instrument at a time you may not need a ADC at all. Apogee has a good Standalone DAC, I have no Experience with it. You only need a sound card like Quantum if your plugging external instruments into it like guitars, mics, synths... if your all virtual most of the Quantum features will be unused. That said, it might just be a mater of time before you want to start plugging stuff in.

I use my quantum for all kinds of instruments, and, unlike any other box I have tried I can load up each input with a pedal boards worth of high quality digital effects and still experience <3ms of latency at 44.1kHz. I don’t even use space, mod or time based pedals anymore because my plugs are better. I mostly play bass, synths and vocals. I use to have a huge pedal board, now just my favorite funky fuzz+filter pedal and occasionally an analog compressor and the rest of my effects are in the DAW. Synths go straight to daw with bit of the XMAX color on them. Guitar straight into Guitar rig....

Cheers
Old 6th April 2020
  #124
Lives for gear
 
Jim Rosebrook's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpl. Punishment View Post
... 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....
I believe Apple offers their technology claims within Thunderbolt spec and mini-displayport royalty free.. so "outlandish royalties" would be incorrect.

Last edited by Jim Rosebrook; 7th April 2020 at 01:18 AM..
Old 7th April 2020
  #125
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esla View Post
Something may have been lost in communication but if your only recording 1 virtual instrument at a time you may not need a ADC at all. Apogee has a good Standalone DAC, I have no Experience with it. You only need a sound card like Quantum if your plugging external instruments into it like guitars, mics, synths... if your all virtual most of the Quantum features will be unused. That said, it might just be a mater of time before you want to start plugging stuff in.

I use my quantum for all kinds of instruments, and, unlike any other box I have tried I can load up each input with a pedal boards worth of high quality digital effects and still experience <3ms of latency at 44.1kHz. I don’t even use space, mod or time based pedals anymore because my plugs are better. I mostly play bass, synths and vocals. I use to have a huge pedal board, now just my favorite funky fuzz+filter pedal and occasionally an analog compressor and the rest of my effects are in the DAW. Synths go straight to daw with bit of the XMAX color on them. Guitar straight into Guitar rig....

Cheers
Actually, this would be true if I didn't need the ins and outs but I use them for outboard comps, eq's, etc., and thanks for the latency info. Cheers.
Old 7th April 2020
  #126
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esla View Post
Something may have been lost in communication but if your only recording 1 virtual instrument at a time you may not need a ADC at all. Apogee has a good Standalone DAC, I have no Experience with it. You only need a sound card like Quantum if your plugging external instruments into it like guitars, mics, synths... if your all virtual most of the Quantum features will be unused. That said, it might just be a mater of time before you want to start plugging stuff in.

I use my quantum for all kinds of instruments, and, unlike any other box I have tried I can load up each input with a pedal boards worth of high quality digital effects and still experience <3ms of latency at 44.1kHz. I don’t even use space, mod or time based pedals anymore because my plugs are better. I mostly play bass, synths and vocals. I use to have a huge pedal board, now just my favorite funky fuzz+filter pedal and occasionally an analog compressor and the rest of my effects are in the DAW. Synths go straight to daw with bit of the XMAX color on them. Guitar straight into Guitar rig....

Cheers
May i ask what the difference is tracking with plugs as opposed to just throwing them on after you've recorded?

I've never tracked with internal plug ins...I always post process.
Old 7th April 2020
  #127
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Primativ View Post
May i ask what the difference is tracking with plugs as opposed to just throwing them on after you've recorded?

I've never tracked with internal plug ins...I always post process.
Bruh, its the fun factor baby!!!!!

If you want to toss in a bunch of beat synced phasers, delays, frequency shifters.... it is allot of fun. Also, for guitar, having amp and cab sims for tracking will give you a more natural vibe.

Most usb interfaces can't do this with out having a poor latency issues but with the speed of the Quantum it feels like your patching your instrument through high end digital hardware effects.

Last edited by Esla; 8th April 2020 at 07:24 AM..
Old 13th April 2020
  #128
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpl. Punishment View Post
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.
I just heard from the Technical Support Lead over at Presonus and this is what he said... The Quantum 2626 uses the AK4458 and the AK5558 components.
Old 14th April 2020
  #129
Lives for gear
I ordered one yesterday. I think I will miss the led metering of the Q2 but will welcome the extra inputs! I expect the same quality.
Old 14th April 2020
  #130
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loud Noize Ent. View Post
I just heard from the Technical Support Lead over at Presonus and this is what he said... The Quantum 2626 uses the AK4458 and the AK5558 components.
Interesting. Based on the datasheet for the AK5558 and comparing that to the specs for the 2626, it appears Presonus has upgraded to a faster 32-bit 8-channel ADC/DACs. That should yield higher performance at a much lower per-unit cost.

Nice!
Old 14th April 2020
  #131
Lives for gear
 
Jim Rosebrook's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esla View Post
I ordered one yesterday. I think I will miss the led metering of the Q2 but will welcome the extra inputs! I expect the same quality.
I have had both Q2 and 2626... Excellent performance from both!

Feature I miss most on 2626 is remote control mic pre's, but for lower price an ok compromise.
Old 14th April 2020
  #132
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esla View Post
I ordered one yesterday. I think I will miss the led metering of the Q2 but will welcome the extra inputs! I expect the same quality.
This has been one of my favorite features of the Q2 so far. It’s great to run outboard preamps, which don’t have meters, into the Q2 and have said metering. This is especially helpful when Q2/laptop are not close to me. I can see my levels clearly when sitting behind the drums.
Old 24th April 2020
  #133
Lives for gear
I got the Q2626 yesterday. I only had about an hour with it and only plugged in a couple synths so I haven't tried a low impedance instrument or microphone yet.

Monitoring is easy enough through Universal Control. The biggest draw backs for the Q2626 is that phantom power can't be triggered independently per channel and that the headphone monitors are Main Output only. If you can handle those draw backs this thing is a steal.
Old 24th April 2020
  #134
Here for the gear
 

Hi ! I buy the Quantum 2626 T3 1 month ago. The Q2626 don' t work at 100% well with Cubase9.5 The Control Center (the Q2626 T3 software)don't have any controls?, no channel buttons in or out (for manage the output levels for ex.), only show the level.
I can record with a microfon but I ca't hear the microfon when i must record
Before a used an M-Audio 610 Profire and a don't have all this problems.
If it is something that i don't do well, please help me to manage the new Quantum 2626 T3, because i'm sure that it is a great hardware.
Thank you.
Old 24th April 2020
  #135
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joli68 View Post
Hi ! I buy the Quantum 2626 T3 1 month ago. The Q2626 don' t work at 100% well with Cubase9.5 The Control Center (the Q2626 T3 software)don't have any controls?, no channel buttons in or out (for manage the output levels for ex.), only show the level.
I can record with a microfon but I ca't hear the microfon when i must record
Before a used an M-Audio 610 Profire and a don't have all this problems.
If it is something that i don't do well, please help me to manage the new Quantum 2626 T3, because i'm sure that it is a great hardware.
Thank you.
Only controls available are knobs in unit and the levels in your DAW. This makes workflow quick and latency the best available.
Old 24th April 2020
  #136
Here for the gear
 

Thank you very much, for a quick response.


Only one thing. Why i don' t have return of the voice in the headphones or any output channels when i record.*

*I try with all channels. Maybe some incompatibility with Cubase ?

*Thank you.
Old 24th April 2020
  #137
Lives for gear
I am not familiar with Cubase, in my DAWs I have to pay attention to route Input and output for each channel. So if you are recording Q2626 input 1 to channel 1 in your DAW you need to:

1)route input 1 to DAW channel 1
2)route channel 1 output to Q2626 main output

Essentially your cutting out the middle man, you already have analog input mix on Q2626 and your DAW mixer, no need to waste resources on a middleman mixer if your not running DSP in the sound card.
Old 30th April 2020
  #138
Gear Addict
 

Kinda confused on the definition of standalone here...

can I run my computer (Mac) audio through this guy using Audio MIDI Setup? I come from the Digi 002r world. It was a simpler time (my 002r is still rocking... thinking a leftover/used Q2 might be its replacement).
Old 1st May 2020
  #139
Here for the gear
 

Hi ! There is someone who use Quantum 2626 T3 with Cubase 9.5 in Windows 10 ? I try hard but i can't hear the microphone in headphones. I can record the voice, but i have no return in headphones. I try the same settings in Studio One 4 and it work very well. In Cubase .....don't work. After few emails with the Presonus technical support , they told me that is Steinberg problem. I have also an M-audio 610 Profire , and i can use it without any problem.
So......Please ! Someone use Q2636T3 with Cubase 9.5 in Windows 10 ? It work ?
Old 1st May 2020
  #140
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joli68 View Post
Hi ! There is someone who use Quantum 2626 T3 with Cubase 9.5 in Windows 10 ? I try hard but i can't hear the microphone in headphones. I can record the voice, but i have no return in headphones. I try the same settings in Studio One 4 and it work very well. In Cubase .....don't work. After few emails with the Presonus technical support , they told me that is Steinberg problem. I have also an M-audio 610 Profire , and i can use it without any problem.
So......Please ! Someone use Q2636T3 with Cubase 9.5 in Windows 10 ? It work ?
Is there such a setting as "record monitoring" for your audio channels in Cubase?
Old 1st May 2020
  #141
Here for the gear
 

The setup in Cubase is: Inputs Left channel (Mic in) - Channel 1 Input of the Q2626T3
and Master outputs of Cubase in Main Outputs of Q2626T3
Old 1st May 2020
  #142
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joli68 View Post
The setup in Cubase is: Inputs Left channel (Mic in) - Channel 1 Input of the Q2626T3
and Master outputs of Cubase in Main Outputs of Q2626T3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5I4fDGX6CIc

Quantum has no direct monitoring, so you need to enable monitoring on the track in the daw.
Old 5th May 2020
  #143
Here for the gear
 

Thank you! If i click on the monitor button i hear the sound double in the earphones. If i disactivate the monitor button i can' t hear the microphone like i said before.
Old 14th May 2020
  #144
Here for the gear
 

I have been following this thread for a while but Im unsure if anyone confirmed if the same converters are used in the 2626 as the original Quantum.

I already have the original Quantum but I was looking to buy a DP88 for more IO but realised this is cheaper.The plan was to use the ins and the outs from the original quantum for the ins to a patchbay for outboard and the 2626 as mic pres.

I did read somewhere in this thread that I could just connect the two via thunderbolt and not have to worry about ADAT.

Has anyone had an experience with connecting this to the original quantum and are all of the ins continued when another quantum is attached(ie input 11 12 ... on the second quantum)?
Old 15th May 2020
  #145
Lives for gear
 

Hi Aaron,

Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron_js View Post
I have been following this thread for a while but Im unsure if anyone confirmed if the same converters are used in the 2626 as the original Quantum.
No, the new 2626 uses different 32-bit converters. Scroll up a bit, maybe a page or two back for the conversation I had with ... someone (can't recall who as I'm typing. That and I've slept since then...)

Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron_js View Post
I already have the original Quantum but I was looking to buy a DP88 for more IO but realised this is cheaper.The plan was to use the ins and the outs from the original quantum for the ins to a patchbay for outboard and the 2626 as mic pres.
If all you're looking to do is expand your interface, ADAT would be a much more economical and expandable solution. I think I've poo-poohed the DP88 enough as its only "pro" is the remote controlled preamps. But since the 2626 doesn't have remote controlled pre's either, you'd be better off getting something like the Tascam SERIES 8p Dyna or my personal choice, the Presonus Digimax FS. Others have been mentioned as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron_js View Post
I did read somewhere in this thread that I could just connect the two via thunderbolt and not have to worry about ADAT.
That seems to be the consensus. Although the "worry" about ADAT isn't exactly a worry. Lots of 8-channel ADAT expansion options out there that are compatible with the Quantums by virtue of being ADAT. Get a BNC cable, use the Q as master clock, and you're off to the races.
Old 15th May 2020
  #146
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpl. Punishment View Post
Hi Aaron,

Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron_js View Post
I have been following this thread for a while but Im unsure if anyone confirmed if the same converters are used in the 2626 as the original Quantum.
No, the new 2626 uses different 32-bit converters. Scroll up a bit, maybe a page or two back for the conversation I had with ... someone (can't recall who as I'm typing. That and I've slept since then...)

Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron_js View Post
I already have the original Quantum but I was looking to buy a DP88 for more IO but realised this is cheaper.The plan was to use the ins and the outs from the original quantum for the ins to a patchbay for outboard and the 2626 as mic pres.
If all you're looking to do is expand your interface, ADAT would be a much more economical and expandable solution. I think I've poo-poohed the DP88 enough as its only "pro" is the remote controlled preamps. But since the 2626 doesn't have remote controlled pre's either, you'd be better off getting something like the Tascam SERIES 8p Dyna or my personal choice, the Presonus Digimax FS. Others have been mentioned as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aaron_js View Post
I did read somewhere in this thread that I could just connect the two via thunderbolt and not have to worry about ADAT.
That seems to be the consensus. Although the "worry" about ADAT isn't exactly a worry. Lots of 8-channel ADAT expansion options out there that are compatible with the Quantums by virtue of being ADAT. Get a BNC cable, use the Q as master clock, and you're off to the races.
Thank you so much for the reply and help really appreciate it. Im currently using a Focusrite Octopre Mk2 and was looking for something with better quality pres. Was hoping the quantum would have had some seem-less integration but as you pointed out it doesn't have digitally controlled pres
Old 15th May 2020
  #147
Here for the gear
 

So I Just got my quantum 2 mostly because I also need the smaller footprint for my mobile rig, and need more I/O for home studio work, which option would be "best" if there is one, for daisy chaining and what would be the trade offs between a dp88, or a quantum 1 rack unit, before they disappear completely, or a 2626 even though I'm not quite sold on it, plus might as well just stick with tb2. I prefer to stay within the quantum ecosystem also.
Old 16th May 2020
  #148
Lives for gear
 
~ufo~'s Avatar
You could also get a second quantum 2 if 8 pres is enough for you. Or add 8 pres via adat.
Old 16th May 2020
  #149
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AWOL View Post
So I Just got my quantum 2 mostly because I also need the smaller footprint for my mobile rig, and need more I/O for home studio work, which option would be "best" if there is one, for daisy chaining and what would be the trade offs between a dp88, or a quantum 1 rack unit, before they disappear completely, or a 2626 even though I'm not quite sold on it, plus might as well just stick with tb2. I prefer to stay within the quantum ecosystem also.

I'm attaching a pic of my mobile rig. My only "drawback" is I have to get into the back for the other 6 preamps of the Quantum, but the last show I recorded (back in December!) I used 12 inputs, so the two Digimax units did come in handy and let me have all the inputs right up front.

I came across the Digimax FS units quite by accident, and the first two I bought were an insane $35 each, but no power supplies. I'd been wanting to replace my Behringer ADA8000s for a while only because of no S/MUX support, but when I was able to hook up the Digimax -- Oh. My. God.
Attached Thumbnails
PreSonus Expands Thunderbolt Interface Line with Quantum 2626-remote_rig.jpg  
Old 16th May 2020
  #150
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpl. Punishment View Post
I'm attaching a pic of my mobile rig. My only "drawback" is I have to get into the back for the other 6 preamps of the Quantum, but the last show I recorded (back in December!) I used 12 inputs, so the two Digimax units did come in handy and let me have all the inputs right up front.

I came across the Digimax FS units quite by accident, and the first two I bought were an insane $35 each, but no power supplies. I'd been wanting to replace my Behringer ADA8000s for a while only because of no S/MUX support, but when I was able to hook up the Digimax -- Oh. My. God.
Digimax fs? Those look just like the 2626, is that the older version of it? I agree about the rear inputs kinda sucking, but I also like the remote control pres, I guess that's the tug isn't it? How do the digimax compare to the 2626 or even the dp88? Do you still have the remote control capability via software?
📝 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