Alternatives to RME?

[rggillespie]

My rme fireface 400 has been a faithful friend forever but one channel is working intermittently now and I’m was going to get the equivalent current model which seems to be ucx 2. Speaking to dealers it seems that there aren’t any to buy and they have no idea when the stock will come in. It could be 6 months to a year even, they just don’t know. I’m quite alone in this but not a huge fan of totalmix, so I’m not totally wedded to rme. I wondered if there are any alternatives that other users maybe could recommend? There is stock of an RME Adi pro 2 but I’m not sure if this is a like for like replacement for my fireface 400. I’m using a pc running reaper and recording using not more than 2 mics at any one time. Any recommendations much appreciated, everything goes through a cranbourne pre into the fireface. So I’m not using the rme mic pre side currently. Thanks in advance,

[Matt Houghton]

Where are you based (re availability of the RMEs, might be worth checking with the distributor, not just dealers).

I like and trust RME, but there are loads of alternatives. Audient and MOTU spring to mind as decent options, for example. But what precisely do you need in terms of the number of inputs (mic, line, digital) and outputs (line, headphones, digital) and are you wedded to the FF400 form factor?

[Wonks]

Andertons indicate 15th May for their next delivery of the UCX 2.

[rggillespie]

Thanks for the heads up about Andertons Wonks, I had gone to KMR as they were offering a special offer of some Beyer headphones with the RME purchase. My dear old akg 271's are also on their last legs, so I was killing two birds with one stone. I think I could wait till May, a couple of months would be ok, hopefully it doesn't go backwards from there. I was told they have people waiting from October for rme babyface's with no end in sight.
The fireface 400 seems to have everything I need, I think its just converting now as the Cranborne is providing all the phantom power and gain for mics. The fireface mic input settings and line are all at 0.0db. I did this because one of mic inputs on the front of the fireface is faulty. If everything goes through the cranborne perhaps I don't need something with mic pre's? I'm not sure what the rme adi pro 2 is, and its seems to be even more costly than the ucx2, so maybe not for me.

[Hugh Robjohns]

I'm not sure what the rme adi pro 2 is, and its seems to be even more costly than the ucx2, so maybe not for me.

It's one of their flagship next-gen products, aimed more at the loony hi-fi brigade as a system preamp/controller (with a remote control!) rather than for stalwart home studio types wanting to record a bit of guitar and vocals.

It's basically a 2x2 channel line-level only USB interface with a reference grade AD/DA converters and a very good quality reference headphone amp. However, it also has ADAT, S/PDIF and AES digital I/O which allows it to be used as a 6-in, 8-out interface.

https://www.rme-audio.de/adi-2-pro-fs-be.html

[RichardT]

AD and DA at 768kHz! Those files are going to be large…..

[Hugh Robjohns]

But just think of all those medium-wave channels you can record...

[resistorman]

If everything goes through the cranborne perhaps I don't need something with mic pre's?

If this is working for you, you could likely continue working this way indefinitely. Also, if it’s just a mic channel acting up it may be something as simple as a bad solder joint or corrosion on an internal connector, so it may be worthwhile having a tech give it a once over.

[rggillespie]

If this is working for you, you could likely continue working this way indefinitely.

I had been wondering if there is a noticeable difference in sound quality between a fireface 400 and the latest RME equivalent. Mine must be about 20+ years old and has seen off 3 pcs but I assume the RME sound quality has improved in this time?

[Arpangel]

You’re using a Cranbourne so you’ve already got a great preamp, but I’d investigate the Focusrite Clarett range, a different sound to RME, check it out.

[Nazard]

It's one of their flagship next-gen products, aimed more at the loony hi-fi brigade as a system preamp/controller (with a remote control!) rather than for stalwart home studio types wanting to record a bit of guitar and vocals.

Certainly true, but for some people, e.g. me, it would be a very good option and this version, updated from your 2017 review of its predecessor, has improved M/S processing plus other tweaks.

[rggillespie]

Hi Arpangel, thansk fore the advice, when you say 'but I’d investigate the Focusrite Clarett range, a different sound to RME, check it out.'
Does this mean that the various manufacturers have a sound that differs in the same way speakers do?

[Wonks]

Arpangel has a dislike of RME interfaces since having one which was probably faulty and insists they have a nasty ‘sound’, which no one else hears.

The sound of the interface will be mainly determined by the preamps used. In general, these days the differences are slight and very subtle.

My only direct comparison testing of interfaces with friends was maybe 14 years ago when the first Focusrite Saffires came out and we compared a Saffire Pro 40, Fireface 800 and a MOTU Traveller.

The Saffire and the Fireface were almost identical in sound, whilst the MOTU was slightly brighter but still very similar.

Since then, converters have improved in performance and most preamps above budget level (and some of those as well) have also improved to match.

So unless the interface has some circuitry (normally switchable) designed to add in some ‘character’, or the preamps are really pushed hard, the sounds are pretty much the same, and you’d need a very well treated room and very good monitors to hear any difference. Other factors play a much larger influence in the recorded sound.

[Arpangel]

Hi Arpangel, thansk fore the advice, when you say 'but I’d investigate the Focusrite Clarett range, a different sound to RME, check it out.'
Does this mean that the various manufacturers have a sound that differs in the same way speakers do?

Not as obvious as in say, monitors, but yes, interfaces have a sound, if they didn’t, then people wouldn’t choose one over another, and for me sound, is the first priority, but I realise others have different priorities.
As for RME, I’m not the only one to have noticed that they have a particular sound, I’ve heard this talked about by other users. They have moved on since I had my UCX nine years ago, changes in converters etc, so my issues may be irrelevant now, so bare that in mind, check them out.
If something is great and suits my ears it stays, if not, it goes, my views aren’t the only ones, and I’m not a professional user day in day out, and I don’t have "golden ears"
I have my preferences, and Focusrite make great interfaces, with a definite recognisable sound, I gave away my old Saffire interface to a friend, I got a call from him saying how good it sounded, so that goes to show that there are differences, nothing is "completely" 100% transparent.

[Hugh Robjohns]

...but yes, interfaces have a sound, if they didn’t, then people wouldn’t choose one over another...

Yes they would!

They'd choose one interface over another for price, or for I/O counts, or for extra features (high-z inputs, volume control, headphone amps, etc etc).

Sound may well be a factor too, but modern interfaces all measure and sound so good (when used within their intended working envelope) that the differences are generally negligible.

Like the mic preamp comparison we did years ago, I reckon few would be able to distinguish between different converters in a blind test.

Where 'interface sound' may be more significant is if inputs (and/or outputs) are routinely overloaded... in which case the analogue design will definitely affect the sound for better or worse.

[Arpangel]

...but yes, interfaces have a sound, if they didn’t, then people wouldn’t choose one over another...

Sound may well be a factor too, but modern interfaces all measure and sound so good (when used within their intended working envelope) that the differences are generally negligible.

I think that’s the issue, performance gaps have closed to the point where the established brands a few years back, are almost indistinguishable from cheaper alternatives, on a performance basis, the deciding factors as you say are the facilities on offer.

[sonics]

I have my preferences, and Focusrite make great interfaces, with a definite recognisable sound, I gave away my old Saffire interface to a friend, I got a call from him saying how good it sounded, so that goes to show that there are differences, nothing is "completely" 100% transparent.

Recognisable? I've used Focusrite gear for thirty or so years and the early preamps sound different from the Saffire, which sound different from the Clarett etc. There's no "house" sound IMO. Preferences are fine, however. I'll not discuss what "good" means these days...it's anything you want it to be. Usually it means "different".

As for an RME "sound", do you have any links to those discussions? I believe that any such sound is likely to be the removal of artefacts and a cleaner sound than a previous device, which I've mentioned before elsewhere.

Most modern interfaces are fantastic, and more than up to the job of any recording task. Some show problems (or "character", if you wish?!) when pushed, as Hugh mentioned.

[Arpangel]

I have my preferences, and Focusrite make great interfaces, with a definite recognisable sound, I gave away my old Saffire interface to a friend, I got a call from him saying how good it sounded, so that goes to show that there are differences, nothing is "completely" 100% transparent.

Recognisable? I've used Focusrite gear for thirty or so years and the early preamps sound different from the Saffire, which sound different from the Clarett etc. There's no "house" sound IMO. Preferences are fine, however. I'll not discuss what "good" means these days...it's anything you want it to be. Usually it means "different".

As for an RME "sound", do you have any links to those discussions? I believe that any such sound is likely to be the removal of artefacts and a cleaner sound than a previous device, which I've mentioned before elsewhere.

Most modern interfaces are fantastic, and more than up to the job of any recording task. Some show problems (or "character", if you wish?!) when pushed, as Hugh mentioned.

Put the right words into GearSpace and something should come up.

[rggillespie]

Just seen on SOS that RME have updated their 4 channel usb interface to UFXiii would that mean that an upgrade for the two channel one, the UCXii is imminent? That might explain why there's is no stock. I'll carry as I am for now, and look again in May, having been bamboozled by totalmix I find I'm now reluctant to move on from it

[The Elf]

having been bamboozled by totalmix...

Heppy to help!

[Rubycon-Stratosphere]

To me RME has not much to offer for the hobbyist / prosumer market these days. People always recommend RME because of their driver/support.

But for me, the computer is the limiting factor. Every 5 years I buy a new computer and often a new interface.

I was lucky to test a lot of interfaces because of a friend of mine who does music for a living. The RME preamps are one of the most boring and pale preamps I have heard (Babyface up to the FIREFACE UFX+). Audient, Apogee, SSL, Avid, Carnborne Audio etc. are way ahead.

The design of the interfaces is, well…at least they are of good build quality.
The preamps and converters are solid, not more, not less.
Also TotalMix is way too complicated and not up to date GUI wise.

If you take the Fireface UFX+…to be honest, who needs that much I/O‘s?

I think RME shines for bigger studios with their high end line. Mixtasy, 12 Mic etc.. But their converters for the market up to 3k are beaten by Apogee, Lynx or the Steinberg AXR4…

That’s just my opinion.

But I got the feeling that they are pushing the US market and leaving Europe behind regarding availability of products. The UCXII was sold out in the US in December last year and by February they were back in stock. Also the Babyface came back only a few month after it was sold out.

[Arpangel]

People always recommend RME because of their driver/support.

I’ve never heard them recommended solely on sound quality.

The design of the interfaces is, well…at least they are of good build quality.
The preamps and converters are solid, not more, not less.
Also TotalMix is way too complicated and not up to date GUI wise.

I bought my UCX because of the build quality, it was excellent, and it had all the features I needed logically presented and well laid out, it was my first "quality" interface, and I assumed the sound of it would be more than good enough. As for TotalMix, I found the GUI intimidating and illogical, and the FX were poor quality.
As for the "pale sound" that could also be interpreted as neutral, uncoloured, lacking in distortion, which is all very well, but a lot of people like a bit of colouration, and as you say, uncoloured can be a bit boring.

I think RME shines for bigger studios with their high end line.

I don’t think that’s true, they appeal to a wide range of people amateur/professional with varying budgets.

The only reason I feel I have to comment on this subject, is because the price of RME products leaves no room for excuses, if it was a Behringer or something else in that price range you'd make allowances, but not here, you expect a certain standard.
I use two Behringer interfaces, they are a compromise that comes at a certain price point, if they had the build quality of RME I’d be more than happy, but they don’t, what they do give me is a sound I have no issues with, a sound that suits "me" one that I can live with.

[Hugh Robjohns]

We are so lucky in having such wide choices of really great equipment at amazingly low prices. Almost without exception, every interface on the market exceeds most people's home studio capabilities.

When it comes to 'sound' one person's "bland and pale" is another's "reassuringly neutral" — and that kind of personal preference extends to mics, speakers, eqs, dynamics, and consoles as well as interfaces.

We all have different preferences, requirements, and expectations, and the market addresses that broad range quite intentionally. I have four different interface brands here. They each have different facilities and subtly different sound characters, but I make perfectly acceptable recordings with all of them and no one has ever noticed, let alone complained, if I use one instead of another!

[Arpangel]

We are so lucky in having such wide choices of really great equipment at amazingly low prices. Almost without exception, every interface on the market exceeds most people's home studio capabilities.

Yes, we have a choice, and even the cheapest is capable of a lot more than what we could achieve 50 years ago, so no excuses for anything not being good enough "quality-wise"
Hugh, if you gave me an RME and said that’s it, you’ve got to use that from now on, I’d say fine, and forget about it, but as you say, we have a choice, so.
And in a blind test I couldn’t tell any difference, that’s pretty predictable, but even if it’s psychological, it’s a factor I have to consider, after my experiences.