Yes, there are all sorts of bottlenecks and considerations TetraFish. It looks like USB will be a standard that will outlast firewire, but by the time you are struggling to connect your breakout box to future computers with firewire, it will probably be time for a new one anyway.
Getting facts straight is essential to this being a productive forum, There's no need to slag on Tobe for pointing out details. You can state your opinion in a kinder way.
I did have my facts straight, Firewire is faster than usb. http://www.usb-ware.com/firewire-vs-usb.htm
I don't care if your a noob or if you've been recording and working with gear for years, Others can point out things you never knew. Don't be so aggressive, None of us here know everything. Tobe was pointing out facts.
Im a noob, so are you, so is Tobe, he was trying to point out incorrect facts, If he would have told me I was incorrect and pointed out a fact, I would stand here right now and say, I was wrong. I have been wrong and will be wong in the future. I never stated I knew everything. I am smart enough to know what I don't know though.
Now on the original subject, I have used USB(1.1 and 2.0) and Firewire interfaces on both PC and Mac's. They have all worked fine (Aside from a bad unit here and there, it happens), as long as my system was setup and optimized for use as a recording setup.
I wouldn't cal USB bad, If you need to record more than 1 or 2 inputs at a time look into a USB 2.0 or Firewire interface. Otherwise USB is fine.
As a side note: If your going to go for a USB 1.1 interface look for one with direct monitoring(Most now have this).
Now, now chappies !
Okay, enough with the Kumbaya crap.
A few myths to dispell. But first, to the OP, if you're going to be recording 1 or 2 tracks at a time, a USB 2 unit will work just fine. I don't even think you can find a USB 1.1 unit anymore. Consider an interface that has good mic pres and bundled software, like Cubase LE or Sonar LE.
USB2.0 is faster than Firewire400, but not by much. In raw numbers, firewire is 400mbps and USB 2.0 is 480mbs. However, firewire can stream more data in a given time than USB. Why? Well, it's not anything like the highway analogy. In fact, both protocols are SERIAL which means, one bit at a time; only one lane. Firewire can handle more data because the transfer handshaking protocol is controlled at the device level verses USB where it's controlled by the cpu. With USB, the cpu uses interrupts to manage data transfer, data has to wait until the cpu is available to address the transfer protocol. Therefore, USB is much slower than firewire. I think USB 3.0 addresses this shortcoming and will far surpass FW800 when it is integrated.
This is the newbies section and we don't want this thread to get out of control with personality conflicts. So be polite and stay on topic.
peace,
). I like the red light notion. As far as bottlenecks goes, yes, any operation could slow the USB data transfer down. If there is a cpu intensive program running, you would probably see your data transfer affected. Not so with firewire. I heard one time that somebody ran 24 tracks with firewire (not a big deal), but then streamed them back out to an external firewire hard drive on the same bus. That's a lot of data going both ways.
Sorry Grim, Its my retail music sales and 20+ years of studio experiences with noobs coming out as frustration.
The children usually take their cue on how to act and be, not so much from the telly, but from the adults and what the adults legitimize....LOL at newbies blowing up this thread!
}Oooh, sharp. Mind you don't cut yourself !
