Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

UA gets into budget interfaces


Recommended Posts

OK, so Universal Audio has released a line of inexpensive interfaces - I suppose following SSL's lead with the SSL2 and 2+. https://www.solidstatelogic.com/products/ssl2

 

https://www.uaudio.com/audio-interfaces/volt.html

 

[video:youtube]

 

The base model starts at $139.

 

It looks like they spent their beans on analogue circuitry at the input(s) and AD conversion. No DSP as in their more expensive interfaces.

It does include 5pin MIDI in and out.

I'm curious if the headphone amp is decent.

Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 19
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Assuming these are good quality (and they look like they are), these are surprisingly inexpensive. I'm, guessing that as computers have gotten more powerful, and you can literally run 1000 plugins in Logic on an M1 Mac, there's going to be less appeal in having your audio interface supply the horsepower to run specific plugins, and UA knows that and are testing the waters for what lies ahead. I have an Apollo 8 and a twin duo, and I love them, but the real killer feature on them is that you can run plugins on the preamps as you record. There are a couple UA reverbs that I love and use regularly, but they could most likely port those over to running natively without much effort. So with these new interfaces, you're getting the good stuff (a "vintage" preamp option and an 1176-style compressor) that's beneficial to have in the signal chain before it hits the computer, without the stuff that you can just as easily run on your computer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the i7 CPUs Native Processing and their apps finally caught up to Analog Devices DSP Chips.

 

I had a Gigastudio Scope DSP rig 18 years ago that was so far ahead on Hammond and Synth clones, mixing and processing power.

I upgraded to their XITE-1 in 2009 which is a 1U packed with 18 x SHARC DSPs, 12 of them the ADSP-21369 you see in Strymons, Neo Vent and UAD gear.

 

Only reason I even use the XITE-1 is it"s Mixers are just so customizable and every feature including routing can be automated via MIDI CC#"s.

And it routes external hardware into the project with VSTi"s w/ zero latency. Cubase, Logic and other DAWs couldn"t do that until a few years back.

 

Would love to retire this beast and even get a new UAD as the specs look impressive considering the costs. But finding a custom design mixer that can be automated for live work is still unavailable. And since I can have one of the many developers that have the SDK build me what I need, I guess I"ll wait for Native apps to catch up for a Mixing/FX solution.

 

I wanted to buy UAD but after begging them in the forum for an automated mixer I gave up.

 

I hope they get around to that someday.

I could shrink my stage rig down by 2U.

Magnus C350 + FMR RNP + Realistic Unisphere Mic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that UA's selling point of getting their plugins as DSP built into the interfaces may be a little less relevant with today's faster computers, but only a little. IMO the low-end interface segment is a different market - these are not targeted at pro recording studios. It's the bedroom producers, the ones that never had the cashflow to buy the expensive guys. Other than the built-in compressor in the higher-end models, what do these offer feature-wise that most other low-end interfaces don't? Not saying they're bad interfaces by any stretch, only that I don't understand some of the pre-emptive praise or assumption of quality for products nobody has had their hands on yet. I'll wait for Julian Krause's review. I'm not sure if he's ever come up on this forum (maybe the Recording forum?) but he does a great job imo. He'll open up the interface and tell you the A-D chips used and show the construction quality. Then he hooks up audio analyzers and gives comprehensive specs of the i/o's as to fr, distortion, headroom, gain, etc.
, if you have about 15 minutes to kill.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I kind of wonder about that "move dsp off the computer" thing these days. Then again I'm not a pro studio guy. I just know that my 2016 MBP can do a lot of tracks using Repro, Diva and other pretty heavy plugins before I have to start freezing or bouncing. I can only imagine how much more powerful the newer chips will be.

 

I have a cheapie interface myself (Behringer uphoria). I have been curious as to whether I'd notice a difference with a step up, something like an RME babyface. I haven't done that simply because I do not notice any lack of quality with the interface. It's one of those things though that you might not notice until you A/B. Example, I had some high quality mp3s of an album, I decided to get Wav files from HDTracks to use that album to reference with. Wow, started noticing problems with the mp3s after that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do have access to significantly faster processors, storage and RAM than ever before. So the need for DSP on the PCI bus or thunderbolt is much less than it used to be. There of course is still a benefit to having additional processing power from DSP on huge projects - movie soundtracks in surround sound come to mind - but that's not typical for anyone doing at most a 9 piece band with a few AU/VSTs instead of a drummer and/or recording keyboards direct.

 

UA does have a lot of great sounding software recreations of hardware classics, as does SSL. And most every other VST developer who is modeling expensive hardware. I think UA holds on to their DSP hardware for pro customers and to function as a dongle. Piracy of VST/AU is simply rampant, and if their stuff is coded for DSP and only runs on their DSP, that's a pretty solid way to keep it out of the hands of the freeloaders.

Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the concept of adding a compressor to an interface, that is a useful idea. As Reezekeys says above, I will withhold judgement until I can actually hear the interface - which might or might not ever happen.

USB 2 seems pretty dated to introduce in a new series of interfaces, what about USB whatever it is they call it now? Or Thunderbolt something or other?

 

I'm putting a mixed bag together, analog and digital hardware. Will be putting a mic on a guitar amp again. I like the sound of the plugins but I love the feel of actually playing a real, analog sound with air moving in the real world.

Both have their place. I already have a small 2 channel interface that runs on USB 2 if I want mobility, that and my laptop can go anywhere easily. Add a couple of mics, stands and headphones and you could make an album any place any time.

 

For that matter, the Tascam DR-40x and a small tripod is all you really need to make great sounding recordings. If everybody plays well, and the material is good. If not, nothing will help you.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slightly OT but my latest AMD 5600/5700G builds are twice as powerful as my i7 4790k rigs.

They run cool @ 65 watts/72C.

I stack and layer like crazy.

 

I don"t need the DSP FX, but still can"t find a Native automated mixer I like.

 

But Omnisphere/Keyscape FX are on every preset now.

As are ReLabs, Brainrox and Polyverse.

Couldn"t run those with my stacks/layers on the i7.

Funny thing, they made my DSP plug ins before they went Native.

 

AMD 5600/5700G"s are incredible audio chips w/ built in GFX.

Just don"t need the DSP processing anymore with these bad ass 6/8 core models out there.

Magnus C350 + FMR RNP + Realistic Unisphere Mic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

USB 2 seems pretty dated to introduce in a new series of interfaces, what about USB whatever it is they call it now? Or Thunderbolt something or other?

 

USB2 is fast enough for most audio interfaces, especially these cheaper 2x2 or 4x2 ones. Also, the chipsets are cheaper, so more profit for the mfr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

USB 2 seems pretty dated to introduce in a new series of interfaces, what about USB whatever it is they call it now? Or Thunderbolt something or other?

 

USB2 is fast enough for most audio interfaces, especially these cheaper 2x2 or 4x2 ones. Also, the chipsets are cheaper, so more profit for the mfr.

 

That's what people say.

 

My Steinberg UR22 mkII USB 2 interface has a lovely feature on the front panel, a Mix knob that blends between Input and DAW. I've found that knob to be useful for eliminating the annoyance of round trip latency. My Presonus Quantum Thunderbolt 2 interface does not have the Mix feature and I've never found myself wishing it did. Same computer, a 2014 MacBook Pro with 16gb RAM recording to an external LaCie drive. Same DAW, Waveform Pro v. 11. Same sample rate - 24 bit at 48khz. I liked having the mix knob recording a single track with the Steinberg, I've recorded 3 simultaneous tracks on the Quantum and the project had more total tracks on it. I didn't have a problem with latency using the Presonus.

 

Actual throughput of the connection does not equal round trip latency. There could certainly be other factors, the Steinberg is well regarded for a 2 input device. The Quantum has 8 inputs and did cost more than 4x the price of the Steinberg. The Presonus also has 2 headphone outs, 2 input channels that offer Mic, Line and Di, the Steinberg has one headphone out and one of the two total channels can be Mic/Line, the other Mic/DI. Some of the extra cost would be extra features. The Presonus has 2 Thunderbolt ports so a hard drive can be connected. Maybe you can record to 2 computers at the same time, I've never tried that and it's probably a disaster. Point being, there is value in the higher "cost per channel>'

 

For me, I haven't found that my results using a USB 2 interface were "fast enough" without the mix knob. I will freely admit I haven't used other USB 2 interfaces, or other Thunderbolt2 interfaces either for that matter. Others may have different experiences, I can only share the one I've had.

 

I agree with your second sentence completely. :)

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

USB 2 seems pretty dated to introduce in a new series of interfaces, what about USB whatever it is they call it now? Or Thunderbolt something or other?

 

USB2 is fast enough for most audio interfaces, especially these cheaper 2x2 or 4x2 ones. Also, the chipsets are cheaper, so more profit for the mfr.

 

That's what people say.

 

My Steinberg UR22 mkII USB 2 interface has a lovely feature on the front panel, a Mix knob that blends between Input and DAW. I've found that knob to be useful for eliminating the annoyance of round trip latency. My Presonus Quantum Thunderbolt 2 interface does not have the Mix feature and I've never found myself wishing it did. Same computer, a 2014 MacBook Pro with 16gb RAM recording to an external LaCie drive. Same DAW, Waveform Pro v. 11. Same sample rate - 24 bit at 48khz. I liked having the mix knob recording a single track with the Steinberg, I've recorded 3 simultaneous tracks on the Quantum and the project had more total tracks on it. I didn't have a problem with latency using the Presonus.

 

I saw your comment about USB2 being "dated." USB2 being slower than USB3/USB-C, TB, etc., I guess I jumped to the conclusion you were talking about throughput. USB2 can carry many channels of simultaneous audio; that's the only thing I was pointing out (e.g., 32 channels of audio at 96K in MOTU's 1248 interface). As far as direct monitoring through a computer, of course that's a different story. My guess would be that on a <$200 interface it's way easier and cheaper to just connect the input directly to the output, and put a $1 potentiometer on the front panel as a "balance" control netween that and what's coming out of the computer. Put a USB3 or TB interface on a box like this and it will probably no longer cost what a bedroom studio jockey wants to spend on a "budget" interface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

USB 2 seems pretty dated to introduce in a new series of interfaces, what about USB whatever it is they call it now? Or Thunderbolt something or other?

 

USB2 is fast enough for most audio interfaces, especially these cheaper 2x2 or 4x2 ones. Also, the chipsets are cheaper, so more profit for the mfr.

 

That's what people say.

 

My Steinberg UR22 mkII USB 2 interface has a lovely feature on the front panel, a Mix knob that blends between Input and DAW. I've found that knob to be useful for eliminating the annoyance of round trip latency. My Presonus Quantum Thunderbolt 2 interface does not have the Mix feature and I've never found myself wishing it did. Same computer, a 2014 MacBook Pro with 16gb RAM recording to an external LaCie drive. Same DAW, Waveform Pro v. 11. Same sample rate - 24 bit at 48khz. I liked having the mix knob recording a single track with the Steinberg, I've recorded 3 simultaneous tracks on the Quantum and the project had more total tracks on it. I didn't have a problem with latency using the Presonus.

 

I saw your comment about USB2 being "dated." USB2 being slower than USB3/USB-C, TB, etc., I guess I jumped to the conclusion you were talking about throughput. USB2 can carry many channels of simultaneous audio; that's the only thing I was pointing out (e.g., 32 channels of audio at 96K in MOTU's 1248 interface). As far as direct monitoring through a computer, of course that's a different story. My guess would be that on a <$200 interface it's way easier and cheaper to just connect the input directly to the output, and put a $1 potentiometer on the front panel as a "balance" control netween that and what's coming out of the computer. Put a USB3 or TB interface on a box like this and it will probably no longer cost what a bedroom studio jockey wants to spend on a "budget" interface.

 

 

Fair enough. Listening to my tracks while recording is part of how I work, it's a reminder to stay simple for one thing. Agree on the price, you get what you pay for or as my photography mentor once said "Buy nice or buy twice."

I got the Steinberg after getting the Presonus, I wanted something small and easy to pack around. That, headphones and a laptop is a multi-track studio in one small bag, even if you add a couple of mics and cables.

Stands are another story, most of the people I might collaborate with have a couple of mic stands.

 

I've owned a few other interfaces and flipped out of them for one reason or another. "Boring" sounding preamps or Firewire connectors account for at least a couple of them. Firewire worked OK but you have to go pretty far back to find a Mac with a Firewire port.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...