Using Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 and Another Interface Question

[GrandNebSmada]

I am looking to buy a Focusrite Saffire Pro 40. I also have an M-Audio ProFire 2626 that I would like to use with it over ADAT, however in the description for the Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, it says something about being reduced to 4 input channels at 88.2/96kHz over ADAT. Is this true? I have see other people using this interface with others with 8 channels. Are they really only using up to 44.8kHz?

I apologize if this is a stupid question, I just find it hard to believe that so many people are willing to sacrifice either half their their secondary inputs or only use 44.8kHz.

 

[ecc83]

I am looking to buy a Focusrite Saffire Pro 40. I also have an M-Audio ProFire 2626 that I would like to use with it over ADAT, however in the description for the Focusrite Saffire Pro 40, it says something about being reduced to 4 input channels at 88.2/96kHz over ADAT. Is this true? I have see other people using this interface with others with 8 channels. Are they really only using up to 44.8kHz?

I apologize if this is a stupid question, I just find it hard to believe that so many people are willing to sacrifice either half their their secondary inputs or only use 44.8kHz.

First off, why buy another complete interface* when you just seem to want another 8 mic channels via ADAT?

WRT to the 48/88 kHz question. Can you REALLY hear a difference? The debate has raged on here and other places but in reality AFAICS, 90% of 'professionals' use 44.1kHz and 48 if doing video. They reserve higher sampling rates for 'cork sniffing producers' ! I understand higher ample rates have SOME advantages for internal systems, monitor DSP e.g. but not for basic in/out audio.
In any case, the halving of the track count with ADAT for esoteric rates is unavoidable.

*I would think long and hard before getting another Fire wire AI? The protocol is all but obsolete. Macs can use an adaptor with TB but is that compatible with EVERY FW AI? They were fussy bst'ds from the go get!
TB, and therefore FW adaptors is still in the cooking stage for PW/Windows.
Lastly, if extra tracks are needed and another AI why not one from M-A that can be 'daisy chained' ?

A quick check shows neither Thomann (here) nor Sweetwater (there) any longer stock the Pro 40, in fact could not find FW interfaces at all.

Dave.

 

[keith.rogers]

I guess you're thinking about piping into the Saffire? But even if out, then yes, it's not going to support 8 channels at the 88/96 rate, since that requires twice the data bandwidth. You won't find that kind of bandwidth for ADAT unless you jump up to at least the Clarett line, if then (haven't read their specs). You might need to go to the Red series if you insist on 8+8 at 88/96.

If you just want to add 8 mic pres over ADAT, I think the Behringer ADA8200 is a good option, assuming you can work with 48k. Otherwise, open up the wallet.

P.S. Those closeout Pro 40s going for about $200 are very tempting, but I'd want to test one over that TB adapter [MENTION=89697]ecc83[/MENTION] mentions. I have a Pro 26 and much as the thought of having that 40 interests me, I know my 6 and 7 year old systems are probably the last place I'll use the one I have. If it goes tits up, I'll probably go to TB.

 

[GrandNebSmada]

First off, why buy another complete interface* when you just seem to want another 8 mic channels via ADAT?

WRT to the 48/88 kHz question. Can you REALLY hear a difference? The debate has raged on here and other places but in reality AFAICS, 90% of 'professionals' use 44.1kHz and 48 if doing video. They reserve higher sampling rates for 'cork sniffing producers' ! I understand higher ample rates have SOME advantages for internal systems, monitor DSP e.g. but not for basic in/out audio.
In any case, the halving of the track count with ADAT for esoteric rates is unavoidable.

*I would think long and hard before getting another Fire wire AI? The protocol is all but obsolete. Macs can use an adaptor with TB but is that compatible with EVERY FW AI? They were fussy bst'ds from the go get!
TB, and therefore FW adaptors is still in the cooking stage for PW/Windows.
Lastly, if extra tracks are needed and another AI why not one from M-A that can be 'daisy chained' ?

A quick check shows neither Thomann (here) nor Sweetwater (there) any longer stock the Pro 40, in fact could not find FW interfaces at all.

Dave.

The main reason for wanting the higher sample rate is because from my understanding it provides a better sound when working with effects since there is more information. Its not necessarily because I want to listen to it at 96 but because I want to make sure that when I apply an effect I wont get any weird artifacts because of the lack of data in the high end. If Im wrong about this then... COOL! actuallly.

I am very much a beginner (only 17yrs old) but I was looking to buy this because its in my price range and has the better preamps. I would use it as the main unit and the other as the add on.

Also what did you mean by M-A? M-Audio? If so I have see that and I have thought about it but like I said I was looking at the better preamps.

The main reason I was going to buy another FireWire interface is because it fits into my existing setup and theres no cost because I dont have to buy a thunderbolt card.

 

[ecc83]

Yes, sorry, M-Audio. I suggested that because although 'in theory' you can, AFAIK* daisy chain any piece of Fussywire gear, in practice only identical AI will do it without bother...or at all!

There IS no "loss of data at the top end" using 44.1kHz everything is grabbed up to 22kHz. Now, if you think you need a top end extending beyond that ok, you need a higher sampling rate but I have yet to see any peer reviewed A/B test that prove any advantages. Things like the DSP in certain monitors or 'stand alone' FX units use 96k e.g. because it halves latency for one thing but these devices don't have to store vast amounts of data and can use dedicated CPU devices and software (but see *) N.B. Most AI systems are optimized for 44.1/48kHz operation, they do not perform any better at 96k+ and some do worse.

"Thunderbolt card" There are some I understand but AFAIK they have not been tested with a range of FW adaptors and AIs? Probably never will be!

*I am but a solder iron wielding valve amp jockey. I only know what I read about digital audio. In some 12 years of such study I have never read of any serious challenge to 44/48 sampling rate. I understand that there COULD be a problem with VERY high level HF sounds such as cymbals but surely better to record them down at neg 20 than chuck the baby out and stuff your drives and cook your CPU? I mean, flip me! 16 bit 44/1 kHz is beyond the dynamic range of 99.99% of home audio systems.

IF! I were recording Mahler, 'Symphony of a thousand' and the legendary Fartfinger was conducting his last gig with NY Phil then yes, I would use 96kHz +44.1, probably 192 or higher. I would also use duplicate/redundant equipment rigs AND probably run 2 24 track Studers synced up! Plus a second Ambisoncs rig. But that is for a one off, historic event. For Rock n Roll? Nah.

Dave.

 

[ecc83]

Keith, the 4 track 96k limit for ADAT is inherent AFAIK. Even RME* (idea op?!) duplicate the ADAT I/O so you need 2 pairs of optical cables. If it were possible to get away with one, THEY are the boys who would do it!

*Their latest, UMX+ has stonking pre amps by all accounts and 75dB of gain.

Dave.

 

[keith.rogers]

Keith, the 4 track 96k limit for ADAT is inherent AFAIK. Even RME* (idea op?!) duplicate the ADAT I/O so you need 2 pairs of optical cables. If it were possible to get away with one, THEY are the boys who would do it!
...

Yep. I just meant you needed to go up the line quite a bit to get the dual ADAT ports, and then of course, you'd need something to send/receive those.

[MENTION=198382]OP[/MENTION], if you have a working M-Audio Profire 2626, that Berhi ADA8200 is all you need to get to 16 channels at 48kHz.

 

[ecc83]

Yesterday I came across a review in SoS of the Tascam 20-20 USB 3.0 interface and it looks very good, an amazing array of connections for the money.

Dave.