I can do some proper benchmarks if you're interested, because actually UFXIII has USB 2.0 driver mode (disables all MADI channels) according to manual, never thought it would be useful for anyone

 

yep i know, i have a ufxIII in my production room with nuendo, logic and pt on a new macpro and a monster pc in the room with the same but ofcourse not logic. so whoever uses it can use whatever daw of their choice. never bought ableton 12 but i could get it off the sister site if someone request it
its usb3 to usbc though usbc on the unit is what i wanted like my galaxy's but the amari is usb3 however i dont use more than stereo with it


----
Atmos Mix room, galaxy64 (nuendo 13, logic 11, pro tools 2024, media composer 2024 with nexus and davinci b/c i work with a lot of video brands)

Pro tools mix room, galaxy 32 with hdx card (protools 2024 hdx, logic 11)

B room, goliath hd (use to be in the pro tools room, now being used native with Nuendo 13, logic 11, pro tools 2024, sequoia 17)

Production room, Rme ufxIII (Nuendo 13, pro tools 2024, FL, Reason, mpc3000,4000, and X. tons of different workstations korg, roland etc)

Mastering room, Amari (Nuendo 13, wavelab 12)

my sons bedroom, Zen tour .. when he gets serious enough he's being given the b room... he doesn't know that yet. gonna make him a business owner by next summer

my production room sound wise i'll put next to anything sound... granted the extra 10-15% from the atmos room isn't just the interface. its the room acoustics, diffusion, monitoring, 38inch deep bass trap real wall...but yea i'll say that attributes to the extra 10-15% sound wise
over 400k worth of investments over the years

 

I never forget Aadvark when the owner was running away.

 

Last edited: Aug 6, 2024

Antelope is like one of the most beautiful women in the world but she can't add two and two together to save her life, and RME is an attractive middle aged woman in great shape who is an orthopedic surgeon who combines brilliance and beauty.

 

Never used "metric halo" but I have used RME gear and drivers for close to a couple of decades and can attest to the sound quality and solidity of the stuff long term. As far as solid drivers go (which is one half of the equation regarding audio interfaces) RME is likely the best there is at its price point. As far as audio quality goes they are very transparent and low noise with a generous supply of headroom before distortion. There are slightly better interfaces out there, but at twice or three times the price point from RME.

 

Yes please

 

Asking as a serious question: Are we not beyond quality of converters and preamps nowadays? Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of really crappy stuff out there. But when we're up to a certain class of interface, is there any (relevant) difference? The industry has converters that can do gigahertz if needed with tremendous linearity. And getting the analog path free of interference from the digital world ain't rocket science either nowadays. I would go as far as to say sound quality wise there just can't be much of a difference between let's say the best 5 usual suspects.
It's a serious question, I never ordered multiple >1000 bucks interfaces to compare them.
I wanted long support and stability and was always like 'from what independent parties measured, sound quality is beyond what I even need'

 

Yes.

Yes.

It was still a thing 10-15 years ago but at least since the UAD Apollo x16 definetely not anymore at all.

 

Last edited: Aug 8, 2024

Yes 100%

 

RME wrote an article about it.
https://rme-audio.de/rme-usb-technology.html

 

Apollo's are decent devices, however getting mixed up hardware wise with universal audio in it's present state is something I would be warned off no matter how good a device supposedly is...

 

On this latency thing I rather hear real world experience.
Most people can write and article to favor their point.

 

The last thing I'd want to hear is any anecdotal claims from anyone; I want to see the numbers. Failing that, I've yet to hear anyone that uses an RME interface via USB 2.0 complain about latency. It's all the other mid-range/prosumer units that I see constant complaints about.

Nonetheless here's some independent reporting on latencies. The column with the green highlights is round-trip. The difference between USB 2.0 and USB 3.0 are around 1.25ms depending on the buffer size, which corroborates RME's claims and is still impressive given their latencies are around the lowest on the market, regardless of USB version.
Image: https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/attachment/2343-ufx-ufx-raydat-latencies-v2-jpg/
Original Post: https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/Entry/68-RME-UFX/

Beyond just this, there are multiple RTL screenshots and readouts of RME's USB 2.0 units showing similar performance from other consumers. Further, what would RME gain from lying about USB 2.0 performance? Perhaps if it was to justify not providing USB 3.0 devices which wasn't the case when they released that statement, it wasn't because they couldn't handle Thunderbolt technology, which they have done and do so now, effortlessly from the perspective of the end user.

So other than suggesting some sort of pathological reason for making a false claim, logical deduction doesn't even lead down toward that kind of conclusion. I don't believe in blindly trusting anyone, at the same time I don't think that means the only other logical choice is to resort to fundamental attribution errors or cynicism to make up for the reticence to accept a claim at face value depending on the available information.

 

Interesting. I still will say my Quantum 2626 TB3 is faster. I use mostly amp sims and really need very low latency to record live guitar.

 

that would be a correct statement b/c the last time i used a 2626 we had .9ms latency at a low buffer.
presonus left a bad taste in my mouth after they screwed me some years ago but i will gladly say the low latency of the 2626 is awesome.

 

I was very skeptical on getting the Presonus, Company status and built quality. But it turned out to to be just that, The sound quality and
Build so far are very good. Somewhere in Audiosex a guy and I compared the spec via a program from His MOTU and the 2626 the specs were very close. Now I am not going to say the RME is better or worse since I have not seen the real specs. I do know RME is not junk.

For me using VST Guitar sims I really needed very low latency and as everyone knows the latency gets worse as you load up your tracks. Not with the 2626,

 

Finally I am a very happy UFX ii rev 7 owner...........cheers!!!

 

Going for RME UFX III

 

Hi there... I do not need Madi or rec to a usb pendrive, so can i go with the RME UFX II and be happy instead of the III ? Are there diferences on conversion or dinamic range etc bettewen them? Or can i use the II if i dont need Madi? Thanks a lot.

 

RME.
Rock solid stability is more important than generic sounding bolgarian technology with ordinary digital plugins!