Thunderbolt 3 Interface, Which Do You Use and Why?

[Greg Mein]

I've looked at these off and on for a while now but it had been really tough trying to make any decisions on what, or even if, I wanted to go there. Years of constant computer/hardware/interface/software changes/updates has left me with three completely different computer based recording setups I'll abbreviate as vintage big, live gig, and modern compact.

 

It's the 'modern compact' system I've made a decision on today. I had Logic installed when my newest MBP arrived in '21 but have yet to use it because I never setup an interface. I could have used one of my MOTU 828x units but I really didn't want to be backwards with thunderbolt 2 and also thought it would be nice to be more compact and portable.

 

There are a number of options but today I ordered a Universal Audio Apollo Solo Heritage Edition. It checks the compact boxes; small, lightweight and bus powered. It should offer top tier sound quality and then there's an added bonus in that I should be able to re-enlist my UAD plug-ins from the 'vintage big' system.

 

So if you've leapt into the Thunderbolt 3 interface world, what did you select and why?

[analogika]

Any reason why you want Thunderbolt and not just plain USB-C? The connector's the same, and Thunderbolt really doesn't offer anything extra for most audio concerns… 

[Anderton]

Sorry, can't be of much help. I have Thunderbolt ports on my Windows and Mac machines, but am still using USB-C because...well, because it works, and the latency is low enough for me. I can cope with 64 samples, 128 with nasty projects.

 

I've tested Thunderbolt interfaces, though, and they really do cut latency. I'm sure the Apollo will serve you well, UA jumped on Thunderbolt early.

[mcgoo]

I just bought the Presonus Quantum 2626 and I'm going to box it up and send it back tomorrow. It ticks the boxes in terms of being fast and nice sounding, but even though the manufacturer claims it is multiclient, it doesn't act like it is. I wanted it to replace my old MOTU Ultralite hybrid for my gigging setup. I use Gig Performer and use multiple instances (it's a memory efficiency trick). Whenever I load a second instance, I lose audio. Spent most of the day troubled, bugging tech support and posting questions on the gig performer forum, all to no avail. 

 

I may end up with the new ultralite mk5. It's not thunderbolt, but it's usb-c and boasts very low latency. Or I may just sit back and wait and see what else comes out over the next year. 

[Greg Mein]

5 hours ago, analogika said:

Any reason why you want Thunderbolt and not just plain USB-C? The connector's the same, and Thunderbolt really doesn't offer anything extra for most audio concerns… 

I was under the impression that thunderbolt 3 and USB-C were basically the same thing hardware wise.

[Al Coda]

11 hours ago, Anderton said:

I've tested Thunderbolt interfaces, though, and they really do cut latency. I'm sure the Apollo will serve you well, UA jumped on Thunderbolt early.

 

QFT !

It´s because true "Thunderbolt" (Mac and PC) is connected directly to the PCIe bus.

Thunderbolt IS PCIe !

Any USB incl. USB-C isn´t,- instead it´s  connected to the chipset in between.

Whether something uses the same connector or not doesn´t matter.

 

At least when using a Windows laptop and a UAD interface based on Analog Devices SHARC DSPs, one urgently has to make sure the "Thunderbolt" port isn´t a crippled combined USB-C port running thru chipset and one can only make sure in BIOS (UEFI),- which unfortunately is insanely crippled in most Windows laptops except Lenovo workstation laptops and a few other.

On my laptop, there´s a quasi hardware switch in BIOS, so I can decide for Thunderbolt or USB-C protocol for the same port.

 

This also rules for other SHARC DSP based interfaces like S|C XITE which uses PCIexpresscard34 on laptops and PCIe card in desktop computers.

Since PCIexpresscard disappeared from most modern laptops, only the Sonnet PCIexpresscard-to-Thunderbolt adapterbox works, which itself needs a true Thunderbolt port on the host computer too.

 

These SHARC DSPs can´t wait like other ASIO/AU audio interfaces can.

They need true realtime sustained data thruput w/o any interupts.

That´s also the reason why it´s impossible changing buffer size on the fly w/ such interfaces and is possibly the reason why UAD decided to go all native meanwhile.

 

It´s not urgently necessary using these interfaces because most other interfaces, may it be USB or PCIe, work satisfying for almost any DAW audiowork now.

But when you have such machine, the above rules.

 

The Presonus Thunderbolt interfaces don´t use SHARC DSPs,- so they work w/ combined Thunderbolt/USB-C ports, which are the majority on laptops now.

But I can imagine they work somewhat better WHEN being connected to a true Thunderbolt port and it should be measurable at least.

I guess, since UAD goes native,- their new interfaces don´t use SHARC anymore too, but I´m not sure.

And I can imagine most Thunderbolt ports on Macs are true Thunderbolt,- no ?

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[Anderton]

7 hours ago, Al Coda said:

It´s because true "Thunderbolt" (Mac and PC) is connected directly to the PCIe bus.

Thunderbolt IS PCIe !

 

Yes, it is. I found it amusing when people at trade shows were falling over themselves about the brand-new Thunderbolt concept that slashed latency for the first time ever in recorded history, and how Windows was totally hosed because Apple had exclusive access for a while. I had to remind them that PCIe cards on Windows had been achieving Thunderbolt-type latencies for years.

 

As to USB-C vs. Thunderbolt, I wrote this article a while ago but it's still valid.

[Greg Mein]

2 hours ago, Anderton said:

 

As to USB-C vs. Thunderbolt, I wrote this article a while ago but it's still valid.

 

Informative article, appreciate that! 

[ElmerJFudd]

Thunderbolt 3 is definitely going to give you lots of bandwidth for high channel counts and potentially negligible latency.  Especially in comparison to USB 2 (which has to be the most common protocol used on audio interfaces).  There are some USB 3 interfaces out now that use a USB-C connector.
 

Some Thunderbolt interfaces (like UA Apollo) also have DSP on board which can be used as insert FX from within your DAW.  The speed and bandwidth of Thunderbolt 3 makes this possible at very low latency.  
 

Do I need a TB3 interface?  I do not.  I don’t track high channel counts (usually not more than a mic or stereo feed at a time).  I mix in the DAW as opposed to analogue summing or off loading processing to DSP cards.  Lower latency performance is attractive but a newer Mac would also be a step in the right direction for me.   I’m able to play with buffer set to 64 in Logic and instruments are playable.  When TB or whatever comes next becomes more affordable and common, l’ll consider it.  

[Al Coda]

On 8/3/2022 at 9:38 PM, Anderton said:

As to USB-C vs. Thunderbolt, I wrote this article a while ago but it's still valid.

 

Thx for that,- great info !

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[ElmerJFudd]

On 8/3/2022 at 3:38 PM, Anderton said:

 

Yes, it is. I found it amusing when people at trade shows were falling over themselves about the brand-new Thunderbolt concept that slashed latency for the first time ever in recorded history, and how Windows was totally hosed because Apple had exclusive access for a while. I had to remind them that PCIe cards on Windows had been achieving Thunderbolt-type latencies for years.

 

As to USB-C vs. Thunderbolt, I wrote this article a while ago but it's still valid.

Apple loves to market stuff as new and amazing wether or not it’s something unique.  Like Apple Spatial Audio, haha, as opposed to Dolby Atmos.   Or having an SoC design.  

[Al Coda]

1 hour ago, ElmerJFudd said:

Do I need a TB3 interface?  I do not.  I don’t track high channel counts (usually not more than a mic or stereo feed at a time).  I mix in the DAW as opposed to analogue summing or off loading processing to DSP cards.

 

It´s not only about track count, playing out stems for analog summing or the usual "latency" we´re often talking about.

Everything connected directly to the PCIe bus inside a computer introduces way less jitter (audio and MIDI) compared to the USB bus solutions.

PCIe has a higher priority than any USB variant in the computer environment,- it´s similar to network.

 

More,- when you p.ex. put a PCIe x1 card in a blue PCIe x4 slot of a PC mobo,- suddenly, the card is connected directly to the processor and even just only using one lane.

The blue slots are primarily for graphic cards.

When you put the PCIe x1 card into a black PCIe x1 slot,- it´s connected to the Intel chipset.

And when it was connected to the Intel chipset,- it HAD to share several IRQs w/ other "hardware" devices soldered to that computer mainboard.

That was it also in Macs until they decided to leave the Intel route and go M1.

 

NOW,- Thunderbolt might become interesting because it supports monitor screens via display port.

So, there´s a iGPU inside the processor,- or a dedicated graphics card in a (blue) slot connected directly to the processor ... which leads me to the following assumption,-

(I´m not sure and only guess that -) true Thunderbolt might be connected directly to the processor via PCIe,- and not only to the PCIe bus like a PCIe x1 slot is. 

 

Is here anyone confirming ?

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[ElmerJFudd]

5 hours ago, Al Coda said:

It´s not only about track count, playing out stems for analog summing or the usual "latency" we´re often talking about.

Everything connected directly to the PCIe bus inside a computer introduces way less jitter (audio and MIDI) compared to the USB bus solutions.

PCIe has a higher priority than any USB variant in the computer environment,- it´s similar to network.

 

More,- when you p.ex. put a PCIe x1 card in a blue PCIe x4 slot of a PC mobo,- suddenly, the card is connected directly to the processor and even just only using one lane.

The blue slots are primarily for graphic cards.

When you put the PCIe x1 card into a black PCIe x1 slot,- it´s connected to the Intel chipset.

And when it was connected to the Intel chipset,- it HAD to share several IRQs w/ other "hardware" devices soldered to that computer mainboard.

That was it also in Macs until they decided to leave the Intel route and go M1.

Yes, without a doubt it’s a superior technology.  But, like many here (I’m sure yourself included), we’ve done PCI, crappy USB, supposedly better Firewire 400, functional USB, actually better Firewire 800, proprietary drivers, class compliant drivers, watched hardware get abandoned before it ever worked right, had interfaces that were stable and sounded good but the developer wasn’t  interested in supporting it on the next macOS or Apple Silicon.  

 

Jumping to TB3 for me would require both a new Mac and the interface.   No rush.  2023 will bring an M2 Ultra Mac Pro, another six months for software developers to get their software Apple Silicon native, and hopefully a few more choices in TB3 interfaces at better price points.   With UAD Spark running at 56 samples latency ITB do we really need to pay for DSP on the interface at 1024 samples?  

[Al Coda]

7 hours ago, ElmerJFudd said:

Yes, without a doubt it’s a superior technology.  But, like many here (I’m sure yourself included), we’ve done PCI, crappy USB, supposedly better Firewire 400, functional USB, actually better Firewire 800, proprietary drivers, class compliant drivers, watched hardware get abandoned before it ever worked right, had interfaces that were stable and sounded good but the developer wasn’t  interested in supporting it on the next macOS or Apple Silicon.  

 

Jumping to TB3 for me would require both a new Mac and the interface.   No rush.  2023 will bring an M2 Ultra Mac Pro, another six months for software developers to get their software Apple Silicon native, and hopefully a few more choices in TB3 interfaces at better price points.   With UAD Spark running at 56 samples latency ITB do we really need to pay for DSP on the interface at 1024 samples?  

 

Use what you have,- I fully agree.

I´m on PCIe (my Win7 Pro x64 main DAW) and PCIexpress (Win10 Pro x64 Lenovo workstation laptop) anyway and I´m not forced to get latest/greatest soon.

But when I´ll be in need for something new,- I might decide for something Mac M1 w/ Thunderbolt.

It´s much too hard finding Windows PC laptops w/ advanced BIOS and a true Thunderbolt 3 interface.

Unfortunately and in most cases it´s USB and crippled or fake Thunderbolt sharing the same connector.

 

Also,- we won´t see NI Komplete (Ultimate and Ultimate CE) native silicon support before NI Komplete Ultimate 14 will be released,- possible later for some of the incl. devices.

I´ll only buy when NI will be ready for M1 and/or M2.

I also wait for Apple becoming more service friendly again,- they promised to do so (at least for the europaen market they SHOULD).

To the mainboard soldered SSD and RAM is not what I´m looking for.

 

We´ll see ... the M2 Ultra Mac Pro sounds promising.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

[Greg Mein]

The Apollo Solo arrived today, it's a handy little unit. I've installed software and only barely tried it out so far. I'm reading the manual some and hope to get up to speed soon, I need to relearn a lot of things I've forgotten about Logic and some other programs and check out Luna. It loaded up with the included plug-ins plus the ones I'd bought years ago, just what I'd hoped for. I waited over a year to buy an interface for my '21 MBP but now I'll have a nice little portable setup for my personal recording projects separate from the rig I use for live gigs.

I pulled out the studio boom, attached my Studio Projects CI and rolled it up under the hood of the Steinway. I've been anxious to try recording this piano for a long time.

 

Quote

UAD-2 Inside • Onboard UAD-2 DSP Accelerator with SHARC® SOLO core processing • Realtime UAD Processing on all inputs • Same features and functionality as other UAD-2 devices and plug-ins when used with a DAW

 

[Anderton]

36 minutes ago, Greg Mein said:

I'm reading the manual ...

 

So you're the one!

 

When I wrote manuals, I always dreamed that someday, somehow, I would meet a person who actually reads manuals. 

[mcgoo]

3 hours ago, Anderton said:

 

So you're the one!

 

When I wrote manuals, I always dreamed that someday, somehow, I would meet a person who actually reads manuals. 

Ha! I still remember your term "samplanalog" from my long gone Emax sampler's manual. 

[Bill Heins]

I've got the Presonus 2626 and it works great for what I do...strictly home studio use My computer is TB4 but I couldn't find anything TB4 audio-wise!

 

Bill

[ElmerJFudd]

5 hours ago, Bill Heins said:

I've got the Presonus 2626 and it works great for what I do...strictly home studio use My computer is TB4 but I couldn't find anything TB4 audio-wise!

 

Bill

PreSonus Quantum 2626 26x26 Thunderbolt 3 Audio Interface
 

A very capable TB3 interface for the money ($699).  Nothing else comes close.  If you go UA Apollo ($499) it’s 2 combo jacks in, stereo monitor outs. No ADAT, no external clock.  You get the DSP, but if you’re running a fast Mac or PC I don’t see the point of external DSP fx any longer. 

[Greg Mein]

10 hours ago, Bill Heins said:

I've got the Presonus 2626 and it works great for what I do...strictly home studio use My computer is TB4 but I couldn't find anything TB4 audio-wise!

 

Bill

I've looked at those, could possibly be a good replacement for the MOTU 828x (I actually have two) I use in my live rig. I don't have any problems but it's annoying having to use the T2 to T3 adapters. I'm so tired of trying to keep up and since what I've got works it's hard to justify the expense at this point however.

[Bill Heins]

I'm the opposite, I'm waiting for audio interfaces to catch up with my computer...Thunderbolt 4.

 

Bill

[mcgoo]

3 hours ago, Bill Heins said:

I'm the opposite, I'm waiting for audio interfaces to catch up with my computer...Thunderbolt 4.

 

Bill

Same here, except I'd be happy with more options with TB3. All the MOTU stuff is TB2 and I don't really want to use an adapter. I already mentioned that the quantum 2626 didn't work for me, so I appear to be out of options for a multi I/O interface around the $1k price point. 

[Greg Mein]

2 hours ago, mcgoo said:

All the MOTU stuff is TB2 and I don't really want to use an adapter.

Yes this is disappointing, I've been using the MOTU interfaces along with DP for many years now but their hardware seems to be falling behind. They have small USC-C interfaces but I need the 8 in/out models for my live rig.

[KuruPrionz]

29 minutes ago, Greg Mein said:

Yes this is disappointing, I've been using the MOTU interfaces along with DP for many years now but their hardware seems to be falling behind. They have small USC-C interfaces but I need the 8 in/out models for my live rig.

I already had a Personus Quantum TB2 8 channel interface that was working well for me with a 2014 MacBook Pro and when I switched to an M1 Mac Mini and used an Apple TB2 to TB3 adapter it jumped right in and worked. For whatever reason, me and TB adapters are getting along fine. I use them for hard drives too although the Presonus has an extra TB2 jack and that's usually were a hard drive gets plugged in, I have a couple of TB 2 drives. No problems with the Mini reading those either. It has TB3/USB 3.1 ports that seem to work for both and even USB 2 works in the port. 

 

I had MOTU stuff but it was Firewire at a time that change was coming. I wish everybody had this figured out, like pencils and turn signals!!!!! 

One fantastic interface with the same type of ports for eternity. Not sure why it hasn't happened. Look at MIDI, one language and pretty universally used as it was created and refined. 

It can be done but I guess "top dog of the month" can't get all their bones that way. 

[ElmerJFudd]

10 hours ago, KuruPrionz said:

I already had a Personus Quantum TB2 8 channel interface that was working well for me with a 2014 MacBook Pro and when I switched to an M1 Mac Mini and used an Apple TB2 to TB3 adapter it jumped right in and worked. For whatever reason, me and TB adapters are getting along fine. I use them for hard drives too although the Presonus has an extra TB2 jack and that's usually were a hard drive gets plugged in, I have a couple of TB 2 drives. No problems with the Mini reading those either. It has TB3/USB 3.1 ports that seem to work for both and even USB 2 works in the port. 

 

I had MOTU stuff but it was Firewire at a time that change was coming. I wish everybody had this figured out, like pencils and turn signals!!!!! 

One fantastic interface with the same type of ports for eternity. Not sure why it hasn't happened. Look at MIDI, one language and pretty universally used as it was created and refined. 

It can be done but I guess "top dog of the month" can't get all their bones that way. 

The quantum I assume has control software that gets installed for OSX?  A virtual mixer, control of gain and phantom power, etc?  Does it have a proprietary driver or uses Apple’s class compliant driver? 

[Greg Mein]

It dawned on me after the UAD Apollo Solo arrived that it's probably a good idea to have a T3 drive to go along with it and I spent another pile of cash to get a 

SanDisk Professional G-DRIVE Pro 1TB NVMe Thunderbolt 3 Portable External SSD, supposed to transfer up to 2800MB/s. Should be at my mailbox now and so, yet again, it begins...

 

My MOTU 828x, DP10 and 2017 MBP with the expensive Apple adapters for interface and drives works fine and will likely remain dedicated to my live rig. We haven't done any gigs for a while and we don't currently have anything scheduled but I'd like to tweak and add some more tunes.

 

And then my old system is still firewire based with a 2012 17" MBP, the original Presonus SL1642 mixer/interface and a UAD expresscard. The big plans I had when I got this stuff never materialized due to life events but I recently got this hooked up in the new room and it seems to work as good as it ever did although it's hard to figure why I'd spend much time using it now.

 

One of the biggest issues I'll be looking at now is all my software (Arturia, AAS, Waves, Superior Drummer, and on and on etc.), it's installed/licensed here and there between these systems and I'll be busy sorting all that out.

 

I suspect that my story rings of familiarity amongst folks here!

[KuruPrionz]

7 hours ago, ElmerJFudd said:

The quantum I assume has control software that gets installed for OSX?  A virtual mixer, control of gain and phantom power, etc?  Does it have a proprietary driver or uses Apple’s class compliant driver? 

This may answer some of your questions and I'm certain Presonus support can answer the rest. 

Good questions, I just fired it up and used it without asking them so I don't know the answers.

Oops, I copied the url and failed to post it. 

Thanks Craig!!! (see below)

[Anderton]

There's a page with software downloads for Quantum. PreSonus makes an application called Universal Control that applies to all their mixers and interfaces, although features may vary for specific devices (e.g., if there's no onboard DSP, there won't be anything included that relates to it). I use two PreSonus interfaces, one as the main, and one adds extra inputs via ADAT light pipe.  Universal Control makes it easy to manage the pair. With Windows, there's also a virtual loopback mode...not sure it's needed for the Mac, given that you can use IAC.

[ElmerJFudd]

3 minutes ago, Anderton said:

There's a page with software downloads for Quantum. PreSonus makes an application called Universal Control that applies to all their mixers and interfaces, although features may vary for specific devices (e.g., if there's no onboard DSP, there won't be anything included that relates to it). I use two PreSonus interfaces, one as the main, and one adds extra inputs via ADAT light pipe.  Universal Control makes it easy to manage the pair. With Windows, there's also a virtual loopback mode...not sure it's needed for the Mac, given that you can use IAC.

Helpful, I didn’t realize that you had bit (twice even!) on this interface.  That’s good to know, as it’s really the most viable TB interface cost and io wise of any I’ve seen.  It’s on the short list for when I get a machine with TB  ports.  

[Theo Verelst]

A 192/24 interface is cool, but requires no more than usb 2.0 to function. Maybe (insane amounts) of bandwidth can bring down practical latency a bit, but whether the extra load of that on the processor is good for stable functioning I don't know. A Usb3.2 2x2 does half the t.b. bandwidth, but maybe the supply specs of the tb make it such that the expensive cable has good facilities for getting power from the computer. I am not charmed by the ua sound or plugins when I listened to them a while ago, which would make me think "what else is there", like DSP is fun but probably one AD Shark isn't shocking, compute power-wise, so it's for low (fixed ?) latency monitoring with some effects, I get that.

 

T.