Alternatives to RME?

[Hugh Robjohns]

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.

I doubt his RME was faulty. I'd bet it was being overloaded and/or the signal path was being pushed too hard.

It wasn't that long ago that Tony was seeking recommendations for comp/lims to control peaks going into his converters. Tony and headroom have never been comfortable bed fellows!

The one thing guaranteed to highlight differences between preamps is to overload them. With some, overloads are sudden, obvious and sound terrible. Others are more progressive and can sound fairly benign with musically pleasing saturation/distortion. Often people use or even rely on the overload behaviour as part of their desired sound. I think, based on previous conversations, that Tony often does....

I wouldn't describe RME's preamp overload characteristic as benign or pleasing, but some Focusrite preamps are certainly more forgiving...

Another likely issue in Tony's situation is the source feeding the interface — Tony was using a mixer. Knowing that Tony typically recorded with very little headroom at the time, it is quite possible that the RME interface was configured to need quite hot input signal levels (up to +19dBu, for the 'hi' mode), and consequently the mixer was being pushed pretty hard and sounded strained as a result — a common digital interfacing problem. Again, some focusrite interfaces expect lower line input signal levels (as do Behringer interfaces) thus reducing strain on the analogue mixer considerably and appearing to have a 'better' sound when, in reality, the better sound was due to a less harassed mixer. This would be particularly evident with a Mackie mixer....

In a nutshell, what I'm saying is that there are many potential reasons for a system acquiring 'a sound' . Some technical, some operational. And without a full understanding and isolation of individual elements its unfair and damaging to ascribe characteristics to one device absolutely.

[Mike Stranks]

Thanks Hugh!

Excellent post giving some welcome perspective.

[Arpangel]

In a nutshell, what I'm saying is that there are many potential reasons for a system acquiring 'a sound' . Some technical, some operational. And without a full understanding and isolation of individual elements its unfair and damaging to ascribe characteristics to one device absolutely.

I did change more than one element of my system at that point.
The chaps at Synthax came round to my place with another unit to help sort this out, they were great, and we performed some blind tests, it was difficult to tell what was playing, results were too variable.
There’s nothing more I can say, apart from if anyone buying an interface is reading this, don’t base your purchasing decisions on what you’ve read here, the deciding factors are many and varied, and some things are just down to personal preferences, that’s it.

[sonics]

People always recommend RME because of their driver/support.

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

I don't think that's fair. If their drivers were middle-of-the-road I think you'd find the hardware would still be recommended for its clean audio. Having such excellent drivers and longevity as well means that those factors are always brought up in discussions, as they should be!

Also TotalMix is way too complicated and not up to date GUI wise.

Those things aren't really deal-breakers when choosing audio gear.

[Sam Spoons]

Also TotalMix is way too complicated and not up to date GUI wise.

There are a couple of people on here who would disagree strongly with that statement. One mans 'way too complicated' is another mans 'sophisticated and fully featured'.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder....

[OneWorld]

At one point I couldn't see the point of Total Mix, it seemed to be made complicated just for the sake of it. I had come from other interfaces where the setup was far easier and intuitive.

Then I started reading the manual and it all became clear to me, and in fact, logically, it makes perfect sense, simplicity itself. Thing is, there is a lot of simplicity, it aspires to accommodate any setup.

Now, if and when I update my interface, I would be reluctant to move away from RME because I like the Total Mix so much.

[Essex Boi]

Now, if and when I update my interface, I would be reluctant to move away from RME because I like the Total Mix so much.

You don’t have to leave the RME stable or lose TotalMix to update your interface. A Digiface USB lets you to use an interface of your choosing (assuming ADAT inputs/outputs). The Digiface might seem expensive for a box that doesn’t really do anything (no preamps or converters), but I’ve recently gone down this route and it’s a revelation. I can pick and choose a collection of preamps and converters for input and a completely separate set of gear for output. And I’m confident RME will continue to update the driver for years to come making the whole rig as future proof as I could realistically expect.

[Arpangel]

At one point I couldn't see the point of Total Mix, it seemed to be made complicated just for the sake of it.

This is in no way a stab at the German people, every nation, and its people, have their characteristics.
German software, TotalMix, Samplitude, Reaktor, Reason, all have this initial intimidation, they seem overly complicated, it’s like, the designer is working in a bubble, and isn’t thinking about the large variety of end users, and how they might cope with it.
I have Reaktor, and Reason, I can "use them" but do I have the "big picture" in my head? no, I muddle through not really knowing what I’m doing.
British software is sort of like this, but not quite, I do find American equipment, and software instantly easy to understand and user friendly.

[forumuser840717]

At one point I couldn't see the point of Total Mix, it seemed to be made complicated just for the sake of it.

This is in no way a stab at the German people, every nation, and its people, have their characteristics.
German software, TotalMix, Samplitude, Reaktor, Reason, all have this initial intimidation, they seem overly complicated, it’s like, the designer is working in a bubble, and isn’t thinking about the large variety of end users, and how they might cope with it.
I have Reaktor, and Reason, I can "use them" but do I have the "big picture" in my head? no, I muddle through not really knowing what I’m doing.
British software is sort of like this, but not quite, I do find American equipment, and software instantly easy to understand and user friendly.

And this is in no way a stab at Arpangel, who definitely has his own characteristics.

You do talk some bobbins sometimes!

I've used recording/DAW software in one form or another since the 1980s and I've never noticed a geographical pattern in how it does whatever it does.

All software has a learning curve and different people process that curve differently due to their varying experiences, needs, likes and dislikes. It's just a matter of progressing through each learning curve and finding things that suit one's approach.

All but the most basic software seems intimidating and overly complicated until one is used to it. Whether one takes the time to get used to it depends on whether the rewards justify the effort and whether they can be achieved in a way which suits the user better than another bit of software.

[Arpangel]

And this is in no way a stab at Arpangel, who definitely has his own characteristics.

You do talk some bobbins sometimes!

I've used recording/DAW software in one form or another since the 1980s and I've never noticed a geographical pattern in how it does whatever it does.

All software has a learning curve and different people process that curve differently due to their varying experiences, needs, likes and dislikes. It's just a matter of progressing through each learning curve and finding things that suit one's approach.

All but the most basic software seems intimidating and overly complicated until one is used to it. Whether one takes the time to get used to it depends on whether the rewards justify the effort and whether they can be achieved in a way which suits the user better than another bit of software.

Arturia great, Valhalla same, Reaper took me about 10mins to learn all I need, coming from Samplitude it was a revelation.
Samplitude was impenetrable, Reaktor same, Kontakt same, Reason you go in you can't find your way out, it’s a maze.
All of the above are great programs but some seem to make it as difficult as they can for to do what you want to do, easily.
Not all of us are computer experts, and don’t what to be, sometimes it’s like these things are designed by engineers for engineers, not musicians.
Regarding certain equipment, software, we have our opinions, and mine aren’t going to change, it’s good there’s enough out there to please most people.

[Hugh Robjohns]

...it’s like these things are designed by engineers for engineers, not musicians.

Germany believes in technical education. It shows in their approach to many things, including product design. Personally, I like that!

If you invest some effort into reading the manual and understanding the underlying mindset these products are phenomenally powerful and remarkably straightforward to use. If you don't, they aren't and appear complex and impenetrable.

In which case, go find something simpler that better suits your level of involvement.