Hi all!

I have not been here for a while now, I've been so busy with playing with my band and experimenting in my new studio!

I finally got the RME Fireface 800 audio interface, the Edirol UM-880 MIDI interface and the Mackie 1604VLZ-PRO analog mixer. By getting these things I am now able to make music, great!

I had no problems setting up my gear. I installed it on a fresh Windows Server 2003 computer on an almost empty 300GB SATA disk (2,8GHz Pentium). The installation of the Fireface was very smooth.

This allowed me to really get to test both NI B4 and Elektrik Piano too.

Let me tell you this, keyboards and synths have had their best days when it comes to sound quality! Softsynths will be the next generation! Of the two softsynths I tried I was more impressed by the NI Elektrik Piano! In fact, Elektrik Piano is by far the best sounding keyboard instrument I have ever heard! I tried it at 44KHz sampling rate @ 16-bit resolution and you still cannot compare it with the Yamaha Tyros keyboard, it's just that great (btw I think the electric pianos in Yamaha Tyros are very good)! One thing about softsynths is that they require extreme amounts of RAM, especially at 96KHz sampling rate. I instantly ordered a 2GB RAM module, which I will get next week.

I was pretty impressed with the B4 too, but I miss reverb in that softsynth.

So far I have learned that I will use Cakewalk Sonar as my main sequencer instead of Cubase SX, the reason is that Cakewalk Sonar can easily handle 192 KHz sampling rate, Cubase SX cannot!

People tell that you don't hear any difference in sound quality when comparing 44KHz@16 with 192KHz@24 sampling rate. Let me tell you this, it's a lie. When you record at 192KHz@24 it is much quiter, smoother and warmer! The dynamic response is much higher and you really don't want to climb down from 192KHz once you have heard it, at least I won't...!

The analog Mackie 1604VLZ-PRO is very quiet! I have experimented by going directly to the RME and by going through the mixer first I and I cannot hear any difference in sound quality and noise!

I am also pretty impressed with the RME Fireface 800. I haven't heard any other pro audio interfaces so I cannot compare it, but I can tell you this. The latency is not an issue! You really don't have to think about any latency related problems with the RME Fireface 800. At 192 KHz you can hear some clicks and pops if you don't set it up appropriately. I raised the samples and turned off buffer caching in Cakewalk. At 192KHz the CPU often runs at 100%, therefore I want to give you a hint, focus on processor speed if you go for 192KHz recording! I thought my 2,8 GHz CPU would be powerful enough, but now I realise I really need much more CPU power. I have also noticed that whenit comes to hd audio recording, 512MB RAM is simply not enough! Next week I will try recording with 2,5GB RAM. But even though I have these limitations I have been able to record and playback many tracks at 192 KHz. I haven't tried more than 16 tracks yet and more than two channels recorded simoultaneously, but at this level the RME can easily handle 192KHz recording at 24 bit resolution without any latency issues!

As far as overall recording sound quality, let me tell you this. I am the kind of guy that is always comparing every music gear I have with the best I've ever heard! When I run at 192 KHz@24-bit it is about as good as the best CD quality I've heard, but if I record at 44 KHz @ 16 bit resolution I can clearly notice a difference when I compare it with the best recorded CD album I know. The RME fireface can simply not reach these kind of levels. It's not that it is not quiet enough, in fact it is whispering quiet, but the dynamic response seems to be the difference. With RME at CD quality it doesn't give you as much space in the sound as when you listen to a very high quality CD album. The RME gives a smooth,warm sound, but it is a little too compact. However, so far I've learned that this can be, at least a little, compensated by mixing good. So I mean for 1169 euro you really get close to really professional recording quality! However, with my next card I will focus more on the dynamic response features of the audio interface and of course on A/D D/A converter quality too.In fact I think even though the A/D converter in the RME Fireface is high quality I think it is what makes the recording sound quality not reaching the absolute top CD quality level.

To all of you that are looking for the best CD recording quality in a reasonable price range I would think that you should go with the Apogee Rosetta 800 right now(of course with the optinal 192KHz board). It is told to have better A/D D/A converters than the RME Fireface 800 and I think that's true. The reason why the RME Fireface is so popular is not that it is the best sounding audio interface, but the price tag is pretty good for the quality you get! I couldn't pay twice as much for the sound card so I just have to accept that this is the sound quality you get when you pay 1169 euro for an audio interface. For me it is a good starting point since the quality is really useful, but I can already feel my next audio interface will be both more expensive and have better A/D D/A converters to add space at 44 KHz@16.

Overall I am very satisfied with the gear I purchased!

[This message has been edited by YamahaAndy (edited 04-30-2005).]

Hi YamahaAndy,
I am glad to hear that your new studio set-up is working out for you.

I also really think that softsynths are the way to go. I was especially interested in knowing what is sufficient computer processor power to run the software. I would take your observations in to considerations as I continue to build my home studio.


P.S A topic like this, I would put OT before the name or put it in the General Discussion section. It is not that the information is not needed or appreciated its just that this is primarily an arranger keyboard forum and for the most part, discussions are usually about arrangers and their use.

Well, as you might know, the more data the computer has to deal with the more processing is needed to do the same thing. A typical situation when the computer really needs much CPU power is if you record many tracks simoultaneously at 192 KHz@24 at the same time as you playback a lot of tracks. This has to do with multitasking and command queuing. Since I have so far only recorded a few tracks simoultaneously I haven't noticed any problems with my 2,8 GHz CPU. But what I have noticed is that the problems immediately enter the picture when I start editing, which is something you do very often. The thing is that Cakewalk pushes the computer to do something with a lot of data (4 times more data than CD). The computer is smooth as long as the CPU doesn't need maximum power to get the job done. But when some complex intructions are told to the CPU and this involves a lot of data to process it soon just can't process the data fast enough because the computer is pushed to process more data and processes than it can handle at once. But there are different reasons for why the number of processes become too high. For instance if the RAM memory is too small it gets much extra instructions to process disc activity (so called swapping). When you add effects it is rather complex processing that is done. Millions and millions of loop iterations are carried through, often in a multithreaded fashion. It needs to give instructions to read a lot of data from the disc, apply a lot of processing on it and finally also give instructions for writing the processed data back to the disk.

If you go with a fast SATA hard drive and a 512MB RAM memory I would say you need something like a 4-6 GHz Pentium if you record at 192 KHz. But if the RAM memory is higher, let's say 2,5 GB, 4 GHz might be enough, because this means the wait time for instructions to be executed are becoming smaller and the number of disk processes are fewer. It all depends on the kind of editing you do. If you plan on recording a lot of tracks simoultaneuosly at 192KHz sampling rate I would choose as fast a CPU as I could get my hands on, at least a 4GHz CPU. As I have experienced, 2,8GHz is not enough for editing at 192KHz.

It will be interesting to see how the 2,5GB RAM memory will affect the editing at 192KHz. I hope it will make my CPU fast enough for what I do.

Lots of neat information Andy--thanks!

Gary

I'm starting to get more and more regretful about the RME Fireface 800 audio interface I bought. When it comes to functionality and features I have no complaints. But when it comes to sound quality in the DAC, to tell you the truth I had expected a little more, I mean 1169 euro is in fact pretty much money. I haven't heard any noise in the signal path, but I was not expecting that either. The problem is that what goes in doesn't come out and the difference is significant! When I play on the Yamaha Tyros, for instance the accoustic piano, what I hear is a rich piano that fills the room in a rich reverb. What comes out is a not as rich piano that doesn't fill the room the same way! I must say I had expected a little more, not only that it would be quiet but also would be able to convert the analog signal in a rich and fair way. I have turned off my surround sound system and Yamaha speakers and only played through the Mackie HR824 studio monitors to really hear what the Tyros sounds like and what it sounds like when the signal is going through the audio interface. The difference is remarkable and I'm pretty annoyed about that. I just have to experiment a little more, just to make sure that it's really the audio interface that ruins the dynamics. But in case it is the audio interface it is not a matter of D/A, but rather a matter of A/D.

[This message has been edited by YamahaAndy (edited 05-01-2005).]