Looking for a USB Audio Interface for Windows under $1,000

[ecc83]

So, aside from the drivers and their stability, is there any real difference in the CLARITY of the recordings from the major manufacturers? If you were to compare a recording from the Scarlett to that of the MOTU or RME interfaces, would the latter two provide a clearer, better recording? Or, are they all generally about the same? This is assuming that you were using the same room treatment and same microphones.

When the latest shiny gizwhijit is reviewed in isolation you tend to get remarks like "deep, muscular bass, analytically clear midrange but NOT harsh. airy, smooth highs and great image precision and depth"* "They" have to say SOMETHING!

When I have read the very few, very careful COMPARATIVE tests the results are more in the manner of. "The X unit was perhaps slightly harder sounding on the clarinet but had maybe a tiny bit more weight on the double bass?" The reviewer was always though at pains to point out that levels had to be set to match within a fraction of a dB and that a change of musical genre could change the preference entirely.

*Something which they all say about monitors but in fact is acoustically impossible. Left and right yes. near and far no. Might as well talk about "above and below" but for some reason they never do! But then, stereo is all smoke and mirrors!

Dave.

 

[cyrano]

Nice to hear MOTU have a "service exchange" fixed price policy. I am of the opinion that this sort of idea should be made EU law?

I don't know if it should be law. Maybe a tax is more like it. That way it would influence the consumer before he buys the stuff. Besides, taxes get policed far better

Denmark already has this system, I believe. VAT is much higher on things that can't be repaired.

We've got the local hackerspaces that open weekly repair cafes. You should see some of the gear that comes in...

Most stuff is repaired in 20 minutes.

Almost nobody fixes stuff anymore and lot of stuff is very hard to fix. SMT does not help but schematics are withheld and spares are hard to source.

The "bigger" brands all offer repair. You can't sell expensive pro gear without it. Not always in house, but still. It's just the low end stuff that gets thrown away.

Anyone catch the news today? We are running out of planet and time. We HAVE to stop making so much shit and FIX the good stuff we already have AND design gear and systems that can KEEP it going for decades at a time.

Yes. Don't get me started.

Steinberg are Yamaha. Might be worth a "back door" approach?

Dave.

I think it's personal. I don't like the Yamaha sound and I'm unlucky with Sony. So I try to avoid those two brands.

 

[cyrano]

So, aside from the drivers and their stability, is there any real difference in the CLARITY of the recordings from the major manufacturers? If you were to compare a recording from the Scarlett to that of the MOTU or RME interfaces, would the latter two provide a clearer, better recording? Or, are they all generally about the same? This is assuming that you were using the same room treatment and same microphones.

There's no difference.

If you can find a difference and dig deeper, it's because of different I/O impedance and the gear you have feeding the ADDA or getting it's signal from it.

Mic preamps do differ. If you need >60 dB clean gain, the choices are a bit more limited. That's why some prefer ADDA with line inputs and separate mic preamps. And once you go "boutique" preamps, with transformers and/or tubes, there are quite significant differences to be heard. But that's when it turns into a matter of taste.

I personally prefer clean. As clean as possible. I can alway add colour later, if I want to.

 

[sparky123]

I am currently using a 1st Generation Focusrite Scarlett 18i8. I generally get pretty good recordings with it, but I have some extra money and would like to invest in a better USB interface. I have considered the RME Babyface but I don't really need portability. I just want a good desktop USB interface. I am using a pretty good desktop computer and my room treatment is good. I don't really have any latency issues with the Scarlett. Like I said earlier, the recordings from the Scarlett aren't horrible, but I think I can do better.

So, given the above, what would you recommend?

At THAT PRICE POINT , WHY NOT GET A FIREWIRE INTERFACE? PRESONUS QUANTUM WOULD BE MY CHOICE.

 

[ecc83]

At THAT PRICE POINT , WHY NOT GET A FIREWIRE INTERFACE? PRESONUS QUANTUM WOULD BE MY CHOICE.

The Quantum is Thunderbolt. Firewire is practically obsolete.

Dave.

 

[BoneDigger]

Well, again, I have almost no lag in my recording, so I'm not as concerned about speed as I am about clarity. I wouldn't think that going to a different transfer type would make much of a difference in clarity, but I may be wrong.

 

[jamesperrett]

The main difference for the user is in the control panel software and the little quirks that some interfaces possess. I'm not a big Focusrite fan because the firmware for the interface that I have isn't particularly stable and the control panel software is awful. The mic preamps are also easily overloaded - which was fixed on their later interfaces only to be broken again in an even later generation. I sometimes wonder whether Focusrite really deserve their reputation but many people like them.

On the other hand I quite like the approach that Zoom have taken with their U series interfaces - the software control panel is minimal as just about everything can be controlled from the front panel - the only problem that I've found is that it is a bit too easy to knock the power switch off if you move the interface.

I'm sure that most other interfaces have similar little foibles so it is up to you to decide which ones you can live with.

 

[BoneDigger]

We'll, after a bit of playing around with it, I figured out why my panning is off and it's 100% user error. Now that I have that under control, I'll stick with the Scarlett for a while. It seems fairly stable and sounds pretty good.

 

[ecc83]

The main difference for the user is in the control panel software and the little quirks that some interfaces possess. I'm not a big Focusrite fan because the firmware for the interface that I have isn't particularly stable and the control panel software is awful. The mic preamps are also easily overloaded - which was fixed on their later interfaces only to be broken again in an even later generation. I sometimes wonder whether Focusrite really deserve their reputation but many people like them.

On the other hand I quite like the approach that Zoom have taken with their U series interfaces - the software control panel is minimal as just about everything can be controlled from the front panel - the only problem that I've found is that it is a bit too easy to knock the power switch off if you move the interface.

I'm sure that most other interfaces have similar little foibles so it is up to you to decide which ones you can live with.

Ha! Found a kindred spirit! I too am not unconditionally "in love" with Focusrite products, well the budget range at least. I often heave a sigh when I read of a noob..."Just bought a 2i2 and.... WTF did you do that when you know FA?! F'rite do a good marketing job I will grant them that.

The headroom issue just to take one point? I do have some sympathy here. AIs only have one gain knob per and if you want ~60dB of gain* it gets very tricky to get both low noise, good headroom and a usable "law" to the pot. You could say Focusrite have erred on the side of the noob punter? Highish gain and low noise but headroom is compromised. I suppose if you want to use a hot capacitor you can always get some XLR attenuators (bet they don't tell you that in the book!)

But, mic amp headroom is one design decision and I respect theirs. Instrument input overload is quite another. There is really no need to ensure the wimpiest Strat on the planet can hit 0dBFS when a fly lands on the top E string!

*And that is debatable.

Dave.

 

[mjbphotos]

Dave mentioned it on page 1, but I never saw an answer from OP - room acoustic treatment? IF your room is not completely symmetrical, (and treated) then that could be the source of the panning problem.

 

[keith.rogers]

Dave mentioned it on page 1, but I never saw an answer from OP - room acoustic treatment? IF your room is not completely symmetrical, (and treated) then that could be the source of the panning problem.

See [MENTION=175976]BoneDigger[/MENTION]'s post #28! (What was the problem?)

I was also going to mention that with near-fields, getting the hf drivers aimed correctly so they're hitting your ears the same can make a pretty big difference in balance perception, as well.

 

[BoneDigger]

Room treatment is pretty good. I found the issues with panning were in the way I was setting up the tracks. I was using a single microphone for each track and when I chose stereo, instead of choosing 1 or 2, I was choosing 1+2, so it was trying to record two inputs through one Mic. As such, it was pushing too far left. Not sure if any of that makes sense, but once I figured that out I did some tests and it now seems to work just fine. So, it was completely user error.

 

[andrushkiwt]

You probably already got good answers above (didn't read through everything) but I've had good luck with my Focusrite. I like it much better than the PreSonus AudioBox, as there's been significantly less issues. I have the 2i2 - it's all I need for what I'm doing. And it's working great

 

[Johnny Don't!]

I agree with what everyone has said about upgrading other components first, as most interfaces made by reputable companies these days are are good enough to reveal quality issues in other parts of your chains (i.e., upgrading the interface won't increase recording quality, only reveal more issues in other gear...haha), from cables to mic pres to mics themselves to yes, your monitors and your room. So I'd focus on those things UNLESS you need some specific features your current interface does not offer. For example, I need higher resolutions AND I wanted remote control via iPad or tablet, so I upgraded to a PreSound Studio 192; it's fantastic. And D'OH! I just checked the price: it's $799, $200 less than I paid two years ago. Seriously...you can't go wrong with that interface, *especially* if you use any of their hardware (they're got some great control surfaces and mixers) or StudioOne (their DAW). And their tech support is great. They seem to answer emails almost instantly.

 

[ecc83]

I agree with what everyone has said about upgrading other components first, as most interfaces made by reputable companies these days are are good enough to reveal quality issues in other parts of your chains (i.e., upgrading the interface won't increase recording quality, only reveal more issues in other gear...haha), from cables to mic pres to mics themselves to yes, your monitors and your room. So I'd focus on those things UNLESS you need some specific features your current interface does not offer. For example, I need higher resolutions AND I wanted remote control via iPad or tablet, so I upgraded to a PreSound Studio 192; it's fantastic. And D'OH! I just checked the price: it's $799, $200 less than I paid two years ago. Seriously...you can't go wrong with that interface, *especially* if you use any of their hardware (they're got some great control surfaces and mixers) or StudioOne (their DAW). And their tech support is great. They seem to answer emails almost instantly.

Glad you are happy Johnny I must point out however that you can get lower noise, lower distortion, lower latency and less jitter but you cannot get better "resolution".

Dave.

 

[Meclazine]

Had a listen.

Recordings are fine and music is well written and performed. Nice guitar playing and clear vocals. The vocals were much louder on "The Wall" and "A Song for Mom"

My only recommendations are musical.

1. Silence.

Need to stop some instruments and replace them with others within the song.

For the 12 bar blues for example, get to bar 10, and stop some or all of the instruments with silence for one bar or two with just the vocals, then turn around.

You nearly did it in "Highway of Pain". Otherwise the guitar just drones forever.

2. Different Instruments

A bass line really adds a lot to a song, especially with blues changes. It let's the guitar escape into lead from rhythm.

Blues harmonica on some of these songs would add a great vibe.

Example: YouTube

3. Textural change

Just need to change up the song with a bridge - key change, something to avoid the same texture taking over the song.

If you get a bass and drum line into the song, get some groove going, and then get them to change their volume, fills and beats etc to mix it up a little.

Hope that helps.

 

[BoneDigger]

Had a listen.

Recordings are fine and music is well written and performed. Nice guitar playing and clear vocals. The vocals were much louder on "The Wall" and "A Song for Mom"

My only recommendations are musical.

1. Silence.

Need to stop some instruments and replace them with others within the song.

For the 12 bar blues for example, get to bar 10, and stop some or all of the instruments with silence for one bar or two with just the vocals, then turn around.

You nearly did it in "Highway of Pain". Otherwise the guitar just drones forever.

2. Different Instruments

A bass line really adds a lot to a song, especially with blues changes. It let's the guitar escape into lead from rhythm.

Blues harmonica on some of these songs would add a great vibe.

Example: YouTube

3. Textural change

Just need to change up the song with a bridge - key change, something to avoid the same texture taking over the song.

If you get a bass and drum line into the song, get some groove going, and then get them to change their volume, fills and beats etc to mix it up a little.

Hope that helps.

Thanks for the recommendations! I plan to rerecord many of these and I'll try to work in some of these recommendations. I agree on the vocals being to far forward on many of these. As I learn more, I'm slowly getting a better overall sound. One of my big issues right now is Dynamics and a lack of "air" in the songs. They sound, at least to me, a bit too sterile. I really would like to add more airyness to the recordings, but I'm not sure how to get there. Perhaps some compression?

As for the recording interface, I agree that there are likely better areas to concentrate my time on. I just figured that since I was having some panning issues with the Scarlett, that I might try something new. I've been toying with the notion of getting a MOTU Ultralight AVB, but I'm still on the fence. I could afford an RME UCX, but the lack of a volume knob is a little off putting to me. I know it can be controlled through the control panel, but I like having an easy to find and manipulate volume knob.

 

[ecc83]

Thanks for the recommendations! I plan to rerecord many of these and I'll try to work in some of these recommendations. I agree on the vocals being to far forward on many of these. As I learn more, I'm slowly getting a better overall sound. One of my big issues right now is Dynamics and a lack of "air" in the songs. They sound, at least to me, a bit too sterile. I really would like to add more airyness to the recordings, but I'm not sure how to get there. Perhaps some compression?

As for the recording interface, I agree that there are likely better areas to concentrate my time on. I just figured that since I was having some panning issues with the Scarlett, that I might try something new. I've been toying with the notion of getting a MOTU Ultralight AVB, but I'm still on the fence. I could afford an RME UCX, but the lack of a volume knob is a little off putting to me. I know it can be controlled through the control panel, but I like having an easy to find and manipulate volume knob.

If you are determined to get another AI and you CAN afford the RME. DO! Not that there is anything wrong with MOTU (and I bet you could not tell them from the UCX on an AB test) but it just ain't RME.

The analogue monitor control is easily sorted, a passive controller like the N Patch. Later on you might find the extra facilities and general "betterness" of an active controller desirable such as the very well received Drawmer CMC2.

Personally I would go for Neumann monitors.

Dave.

 

[Johnny Don't!]

Glad you are happy Johnny I must point out however that you can get lower noise, lower distortion, lower latency and less jitter but you cannot get better "resolution".

Dave.

"Resolution" is technically a video term, but everyone I work with and have worked with the last twenty years since things went digital (hence the use of a video term to describe audio) uses it to mean what depth the audio files have, i.e., 44.1/24 vs 88.2/44 (which is what I prefer to work with; I seem to hear less artifacts when down-converting for wider release...or maybe I'm just nuts) and so forth. I've used it so much that I can't remember the actual real term to describe it. So when I say I needed "higher resolutions," I mean I needed something with more depth than 48/24, which is the highest my old interface would handle.

 

[ecc83]

"Resolution" is technically a video term, but everyone I work with and have worked with the last twenty years since things went digital (hence the use of a video term to describe audio) uses it to mean what depth the audio files have, i.e., 44.1/24 vs 88.2/44 (which is what I prefer to work with; I seem to hear less artifacts when down-converting for wider release...or maybe I'm just nuts) and so forth. I've used it so much that I can't remember the actual real term to describe it. So when I say I needed "higher resolutions," I mean I needed something with more depth than 48/24, which is the highest my old interface would handle.

Ok J, just trying to keep "technical" terms as pure as possible. Lots of people "know what you mean" but the newbs won't. I like to start them off a'right? You are talking about Word Length and it is often wrongly stated as "bit rate". "Resolution" is of course about 6dB per bit and does not change with word length nor sample rate.

There has been a huge debate everywhere, forever whether sample rates above 44.1/48kHz are worthwhile. There seems to be agreement that in SOME circumstances higher rates give a marginal improvement on some content but for most of us, most of the time, bog S rates are fine.

But. like "rms" bloody watts, I am losing the battle I think!

BTW that interface MUST be old! Even my old M-A PCI card was 24 NINETYSIX!

Keep at it chap. Pedant over and out.

Dave.