Firewire is dead, Long Live USB 3.0

So, here is what I understand. Firewire and USB were created to replace SCSI. USB is a competing standard (See, VHS & Beta, HD DVD & Blue Ray, Metric & SAE) with Firewire. Firewire was driven mainly from Apple, USB, not sure. who drove this. (Note: If your technology get's adopted as a standard, you get licensing fees. Xerox still gets revenue off of every Ethernet card.)

My understanding with the interfaces are not just data throughput, but since most of the Analog to Digital conversions are done by the actual hardware, that speed is the first part that matters. So, how many input simultaneous one can get is as much a function of the hardware as it is the connection technology (Firewire/USB). So even with USB 3 (or Thunderbolt), unless the interface hardware can process it faster and push it over, the extra transfer speed is irrelevant as it still has to be converted. I am not 100% sure , but I think this is why we are not seeing USB 3.0 hardware as it would require faster interface processing and right now, it doesn't seem like that is an issue. Only USB 3.0 is coming from mainly external hard drives.

For those getting 32 inputs with no problem, I am assuming you have a pretty good DAC regardless of connection technology. (This is just a personal observation, Apple people tend to buy higher end stuff than PC people. After all, spending $2000 on a computer is almost unheard of in the PC world, it is normal in the Apple world. Summary: We PC people are cheap B%^&$ds but expect high end results like our Apple friends get. Just sayin')
 
What is "AI" in this context?

Both firewire and USB are transmission devices - neither do any processing of the data, in fact the data is opaque to these devices.

ecc83 said:
USB2.0 always WAS good enough! The problem in the earlier days was that AI designers used the processing power of the PC to do most of the work (because they could with usb? FW has to be selfcontained?). This led to problems because 6-7 years ago the average punter did not have a very high spec' machine*. Today, 2.6G 2 cores is a phone!
Then, because usb was seen to be the "prosumer" end of the market the drivers were pretty crap. These days usb has come of age and there is gear now that is the equal of FW. I do wish however that AI makers would get into usb 3.0? The extra speed might not be needed but it is nice to have the "redundancy"? But a bigger advantage of usb 3.0 is nearly twice the bus power which should enable more mic pres and decent headphone levels from portable gear.

*When I moved up to a 3.2G P4 with 2G ram my Behringer BCA2000 "came alive"! The BCA2K was one of the very first usb 2.0 AI s ever made and ran very well (2 mic/line/inst, 8outs, ADAT MIDI in/out/thru, optical and co-ax S/PDIF) but kept breaking down!)

Dave.
Click to expand...
 
fraserhutch said:
What is "AI" in this context?

Both firewire and USB are transmission devices - neither do any processing of the data, in fact the data is opaque to these devices.
Click to expand...

Not so ^ . A great many FW Audio Interfaces could run "stand alone" i.e. once setup on a PC they could function as pre amps and basic monitor mixers and produce a digital output on S/PDIF (even ADAT in some cases IIRC?) indicating a great deal of "native" processing power. This is another reason for FW devices almost always being more expensive track for track than usb.

Almost no usb devices did that. The only one I am aware of is the M-A Fast track pro which could work asa 9volt powered S/PDIF interface.

Then, quite a few FW AIs have onboard DSP effects.

Not at all sure why you quoted me Fraser? But I will take as a compliment!

Dave.
 
Er, aren't you kinda both right? Firewire, USB (and now Thunderbolt) are transmission standards. In themselves they DON'T do any processing of the data (other than manipulating it for transmission of course). However, within the boxes there can be any amount of processing for mixing, effects, other forms of output like S/PDIF, etc. However, none of this has anything specific to do with the FW/USB/TB side of things. As evidence of this, the transmission standards are used as much (or more) on things like HDDs, video interfaces, etc. etc. They don't care what kind of data they're carrying.

As for cost, have a look at the licensing/royalties. USB cost manufacturers pennies while FW is significantly more expensive.
 
Bobbsy said:
Er, aren't you kinda both right? Firewire, USB (and now Thunderbolt) are transmission standards. In themselves they DON'T do any processing of the data (other than manipulating it for transmission of course). However, within the boxes there can be any amount of processing for mixing, effects, other forms of output like S/PDIF, etc. However, none of this has anything specific to do with the FW/USB/TB side of things. As evidence of this, the transmission standards are used as much (or more) on things like HDDs, video interfaces, etc. etc. They don't care what kind of data they're carrying.

As for cost, have a look at the licensing/royalties. USB cost manufacturers pennies while FW is significantly more expensive.
Click to expand...

Err..Not quite Bobbs. AFAI understand things (not a lot! Valves are my thang!) FW always had to have onboard A/D,D/A processing which is why it was both more expensive than usb and (I am guessing here) earned the nickname "Fussy wire" since only TI chipsets could run it reliably.

As I said previously, usb used the PC's grunt for the conversion and hence the problems with lower powered computers. (the XP SP2 usb driver catch 22 issue did not help I guess!) I believe the latest "super" generation of usb 2.0 equipments (spearheaded by RME) do in fact have some processing onboard now?

As for usb 3.0 being long getting done?! The gestation period of Thunderfart was epic in the extreme. The name changed at least once and the protocol was originally going to be optical only!

Dave.
 
Nope. Firewire...better known as IEEE1394 is purely a transmission standard for high speed isochronous data. It's totally agnostic about what that data is--indeed, the first use to catch on (at least from my memory) was digital video. Audio followed on later as computer recording became more popular. However, if you think about it, FW is also used for hard disk drives, etc. just to show that the transmission standard is independent of what data you shove down it. Indeed, on my present set up, the boxes handling FW are totally (and physically) independent of the actual FW interfaces.

(A to D and D to A are handled in a digital mixer with an ADAT out which is fed...digitally obviously...to a FW interface and thence to my computer.) The FW on my computer (actually an adaptor in a cardbus slot) handles video (from my old DV camcorder) and pure data (to/from a HDD) just as easily as digital audio.)
 
Bobbsy said:
Nope. Firewire...better known as IEEE1394 is purely a transmission standard for high speed isochronous data. It's totally agnostic about what that data is--indeed, the first use to catch on (at least from my memory) was digital video. Audio followed on later as computer recording became more popular. However, if you think about it, FW is also used for hard disk drives, etc. just to show that the transmission standard is independent of what data you shove down it. Indeed, on my present set up, the boxes handling FW are totally (and physically) independent of the actual FW interfaces.

(A to D and D to A are handled in a digital mixer with an ADAT out which is fed...digitally obviously...to a FW interface and thence to my computer.) The FW on my computer (actually an adaptor in a cardbus slot) handles video (from my old DV camcorder) and pure data (to/from a HDD) just as easily as digital audio.)
Click to expand...

Ah! Yes, I will agree that the data transmission SYSTEM cares nowt for the use to which it is put. No more than TV co-ax cares whether you stuff UHF or S/PDIF down it!

But, FW and usb are different in the way they handle data and (could be wrong here!) the "bus" implemetation is different in that the more usb devices you plug in the slower the whole system runs?

One thing is for certain. FW always had much more DC power on tap than usb and power is "speed" . Tis afterall how they get faster BBand down copper phone lines.

Dave.
 
Yup. USB is host-based; Firewire is peer-to-peer. USB2 is, theoretically, slightly faster than FW400 but Firewire gives you dedicated data throughput whereas the USB speed is dependent on what else is happening on the bus and in your processor.

I'm not entirely clear what you mean in your sentence about DC power but if you're referring to bus power, that's a separate resource on both USB and FW, providing power to drive peripheral devices and not having anything to do with the data transmission speed. The data speed is controlled entirely by the spec in Firewire and by a mix of the spec and what else is happening on the bus (it's a master-slave relationship) for USB. Frankly, I only have one device that needs USB bus power anyway so, at least for me the whole discussion is a bit of a red herring.

In any case, while I agree that a peer to peer system like FW and now Thunderbolt is THEORETICALLY better, the limitations of USB simply don't affect the vast majority of people--but the advantages in cost and backwards compatibility do provide benefits FW/TB can't compete with
 
Bobbsy said:
Yup. USB is host-based; Firewire is peer-to-peer. USB2 is, theoretically, slightly faster than FW400 but Firewire gives you dedicated data throughput whereas the USB speed is dependent on what else is happening on the bus and in your processor.

I'm not entirely clear what you mean in your sentence about DC power but if you're referring to bus power, that's a separate resource on both USB and FW, providing power to drive peripheral devices and not having anything to do with the data transmission speed. The data speed is controlled entirely by the spec in Firewire and by a mix of the spec and what else is happening on the bus (it's a master-slave relationship) for USB. Frankly, I only have one device that needs USB bus power anyway so, at least for me the whole discussion is a bit of a red herring.

In any case, while I agree that a peer to peer system like FW and now Thunderbolt is THEORETICALLY better, the limitations of USB simply don't affect the vast majority of people--but the advantages in cost and backwards compatibility do provide benefits FW/TB can't compete with
Click to expand...

Heh! I think grokking soon will be!

The point about DC power is that FW devices can be made that consume considerably more than usb ones even when bus powered and faster devices always need more power than slower ones. This meant that cheaper, bus powered usb devices were handicaped at the start compared to bus powered FW kit.

But yes. FW only made it on high end PCs (and macs..Sometimes!) over here and the same game is being played out with TB. Usb 3.0 is here, mucho kit about and PCIe cards readily available for it.
Cables are cheaper too?

( there is actually a parallel with Betamax/VHS. The former was said to be better quality? Well it was, because the machines were so much more expensive than VHS (and a PITA to service!) Once cheap Beta machines began to emerge they were bloody awful!)

Dave.
 
Well, the "DC power = speed" is a bit of a red herring too. Both USB and FW are governed by maximum cable lengths in the spec so the available bus power doesn't really come into the speed. You mentioned broadband down copper in your previous post and there the available power does indeed enter into the speed equation--higher power means a lower S/N ratio. This doesn't affect the speed directly--but the need for error correction as the noise level goes up causes the speed to come down. (Says the sucker far enough from the exchange that his 20Mb ADSL2+ connection is only reliable up to about 4Mbps--roll on FTTP!).

However, this doesn't come into it with either USB or FW. As I say, there is a spec for maximum cable length in both standards and these lengths are conservative enough that you never butt your head against S/N issues. The bus power is there to power the gear, not determine transmission speeds.

Are you up very late or very early?
 
Bobbsy said:
Well, the "DC power = speed" is a bit of a red herring too. Both USB and FW are governed by maximum cable lengths in the spec so the available bus power doesn't really come into the speed. You mentioned broadband down copper in your previous post and there the available power does indeed enter into the speed equation--higher power means a lower S/N ratio. This doesn't affect the speed directly--but the need for error correction as the noise level goes up causes the speed to come down. (Says the sucker far enough from the exchange that his 20Mb ADSL2+ connection is only reliable up to about 4Mbps--roll on FTTP!).

However, this doesn't come into it with either USB or FW. As I say, there is a spec for maximum cable length in both standards and these lengths are conservative enough that you never butt your head against S/N issues. The bus power is there to power the gear, not determine transmission speeds.

Are you up very late or very early?
Click to expand...

Vey early: (man tap problems and on a lot of meds)

I agree about transmission speeds but that is not the whole deal. The AIs have chips in them and the faster they are made to or can run, the more juice they need, usb power limits this. (and the hotter they get. Bit of a faff about this with the latest Intels? Not my area tho' AT ALL!")

Dave.
 
Sorry to hear about all the tablets...something I can sympathise with--I'm on something like 20 a day just now.

Yeah, AIs have chips inside but, for most basic ones these are easily provided with power by even the relatively low bus power provided. If you're talking more elaborate AIs with DSP or whatever, I can't think of any that rely on bus power to drive them. My only bus powered device (an M Audio mobile pre that I use for field recording) is dead simple--just a pre-amp/A to D box. Actually, even my FW adaptor uses a separate DC input rather than bus power. (The FW bus power is a mixed blessing BTW--with the common chipsets like TI, they're not designed for hot plugging and you can blow something up if you don't shut down your computer every time you plug or unplug the 1396 cable.)

In any case, I suspect anyone who needs/wants DSP in their AI will likely also be in a position to let that AI use its own power supply, not bus power. Personally, I find DSP in an interface about as useful as tits on a bull--but that's a different discussion!
 
Not sure if its be mentioned in this thread or not, but it's not just hardware support that's fading out for FW. In Windows 8 microsoft has chosen to remove the FireWire driver support. Caught me quite by surprise when I plugged in a new FW IO module! (MB has 2 FW ports, now useless)
 
boehm330 said:
Not sure if its be mentioned in this thread or not, but it's not just hardware support that's fading out for FW. In Windows 8 microsoft has chosen to remove the FireWire driver support. Caught me quite by surprise when I plugged in a new FW IO module! (MB has 2 FW ports, now useless)
Click to expand...

I checked into this with www.soundonsound forum. It seems there is an RME driver available from Sycom that works well as a replacement for the default that has been deleted.

Dave.
 
Even so, I'd take the removal of the default as sort of a "writing on the wall" moment. There will be work-rounds for a while but Firewire's days are numbered.
 
Bobbsy said:
Even so, I'd take the removal of the default as sort of a "writing on the wall" moment. There will be work-rounds for a while but Firewire's days are numbered.
Click to expand...

It is a leeeetle more complicated than that Bobbs'. Check out the sozz.com thread.

Dave.
 
It strikes me as incredibly funny to hear the term "long live" applied to anything dealing with computer technology.
 
Usb 3

wheelema said:
In all honesty this is not yet true, but it's inevitable. Hopefully we'll see USB 3.0 interfaces at CES in January and throughout 2013. USB 3.0 is already the de-facto standard on current motherboards whereas finding mobos with Firewire is getting harder.

I seriously would not buy a Firewire interface if I could hold off for a month or so.
Click to expand...

I was really looking forward to USB 3 as well and jumped the gun and bought a USB 3 PCI card ($35) found it didn't work with my motherboard, bought another computer and it worked fine, just bought another computer and it had 2 USB 3 plugins. The great thing is yes it does blast files to my backup USB 3 hard drives (I am a backup nut lost to many files over the years) but there is one big problem, if you copy the same files to two external hard drives they go at less than 1/2 the speed. In other words the more you have running the slower it will go, if I remember correctly Firewire doesn't have that issue. So great if you are just using one outlet for USB 3, not so great if you use more, but of course USB 2 had the same issue.
 
Just put together a new recording computer build last night and this holds true. Finding a motherboard that met all my needs AND had firewire was such a pain in the ass that I just went the USB 3.0 route. It wasn't too big of a deal because I needed a new interface anyways. Now I've got a super slamming work machine!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top