PCI Soundcards with breakout boxes - any compromise in terms of latency?

[mrgatenby]

Hello,

I'm getting pretty good performance in terms of latency using an E-Mu 1010 PCI soundcard, having had endless problems with Firewire cards. So I'm loathe to return to them and consider PCI the fastest option. But I'd like to upgrade my soundcard to something with analogue I/Os. I'm looking at the RME Multiface II PCI which seems excellent but I can't help but notice that the connection between the breakout box and the card itself is a Firewire cable.

Surely this compromises the speed of the PCI card, whose strength is that it is connected directly to the motherboard? If I spend all this money on the upgrade, am I actually going to get any noticeable improvement in latency? The E-Mu is doing just fine, it just gets a bit slow when playing back over many instances of VI at once. If there's not going to be any improvement with the RME, I'll just put up with it and keep my money in my pocket!

Any advice appreciated, thanks!
Michael

[mrgatenby]

Gah... and where the hell can I find a PCI card with both XLR and analogue I/Os?

There must be lots of people out there in my situation, but there seems to be some kind of campaign to make it as fiddly and challenging as possible to have something that allows you to use low-latency MIDI, record a mic and a guitar, all through the same box. Christ.

[cm]

don't worry about the firewire cable - it is .. just the cable (with the multiface) ... eg. e-mu 1010 is using a cat5 cable which also does not *carry* network ...

depending on your motherboard also look out for such devices using PCIe expansion cards (the multiface has one) - would be much more future proof

christian

[mrgatenby]

 Cheers!

Having done a bit more homework, I've decided that the best option is just to get the fastest possible PCIe soundcard I can, and run a mixer off it for my analogue I/Os. This means I no longer have to worry about anything other than the performance of the soundcard itself, mainly with regards latency. As far as I can tell, MOTU and RME are the way to go here... any recommendations? Again: no need for a breakout box now, I don't think.

[mrgatenby]

Ah and how do I make sure I can get PCIe? Fairly confident, it's a brand new PC with a great motherboard.

[Mahlon]

Most new motherboards have PCIe. Just check the specs on the manufacturers website -- or sometimes it's easier just to check specs at Newegg. Although, the manufacturer would be sure to be up to date.

Mahlon

[cm]

@mrgatenby said:

Ah and how do I make sure I can get PCIe? Fairly confident, it's a brand new PC with a great motherboard.

simply check the manual for the motherboard which should come with every PC ... it will show a drawing and a list of expansion slots

christian

[stevesong]

 The MOTU 2408 consists of a PCIe (or you can order it with a PCIX) card and a breakout box connected to the card with a Firewire cable. However, the fact that it is a  Firewire cable does not mean that it is making use of the computer's Firewire circuitry. MOTU has just announced a new version of its 828 Firewire interface that comes with new features and new software - - which may imply that their PCIe interfaces will be similarly updated, you might want to wait a little to see if this proves true.

If you want the "fastest" possible card with the lowest latency - - and price is no problem - - you might want to check out Apogee's offerings. Their Symphony card reputedly has the lowest latency available but requires one of their proprietary D/A or AD/DA boxes. These are VERY pricey items: the Symphony card is about $720, the Rosetta AD/DA 8 channel converter is about $2700 + $190 for the requisite Apogee X-Symphony card to connect it to the Symphony, the DA-16X, 16 channel digital to analog converter is about $3200 (+ $190 for the requisite Apogee X-Symphony card - - for A/D conversion you would additionally need an AD-16X box at the same price as the DA - 16X box). To control volume from these output devices it appears you would need a mixer or something like the Dangerous Music D Box  Summing/Monitoring system (beginning at $1400). I've heard this stuff and it sounded great, but . . . . it does cost about $5000 to duplicate the features of the MOTU 2408 which costs less than $1000.   

[cm]

the apogee does have a tiny disadvantage though ... there are no windows drivers available (at least i couldn't find any) and it seems michael is on a PC ...

christian

[stevesong]

@cm said:

the apogee does have a tiny disadvantage though ... there are no windows drivers available (at least i couldn't find any) and it seems michael is on a PC ...

christian

 

Christian:

A "tiny dsadavantage" - ah yes... However, the DA-16X does seem to have a driver for Widows XP. Personally, it all seems rather extravagantly expensive. I have often wondered exactly whose DSP chips one would find inside these things...

[mrgatenby]

Ok I'm making some progress. I think these are the soundcards I've narrowed it down to:

That's the RME Multiface II, the RME Hammerfall DSP9632 and the E-MU 1616. The latter 2 are significantly cheaper, though I'd have to buy a mixer to allow recording of live instruments too. The question is now: is it worth spending that extra money on the Multiface in order to keep latency and other performance issues to an absolute minimum? I'm having a hard time getting an idea of what the difference will actually be.

If there'll be no significant difference, I'll probably get one of the cheaper options with a basic mixer, and spend the money I save on more VST instruments.

I'm so close, bear with me..... 

[cm]

i'm somehow biassed, but whenever possible i'd choose RME ... their drivers are outstanding for all platforms and the mixer utility is great for internal or re-routing of audio

christian

[stevesong]

@cm said:

i'm somehow biassed, but whenever possible i'd choose RME ... their drivers are outstanding for all platforms and the mixer utility is great for internal or re-routing of audio

christian

 

Christian:

I'm wondering if you - - or any other forum participants - - can say whether you find the RME interfaces significantly better in sound than the MOTU interfaces such as the 2408. I realize RME's mixing software has features that MOTU's software lacks, but am just wondering here about differences in sound quality. I am planning a new system and have not found anywhere in the New York area where one can A/B different equipment.

[cm]

since i'm one of the *pig-eared* guys i can't comment on sonic details (i'd assume the used application would have actually more influence) ... but regarding quality and availability of drivers as well as for support the vote goes clearly to RME

christian

[timkiel]

I'll second Christian's vote for RME - I've tried various interfaces and am finally sticking with RME in terms of sound quality, build quality, reliability and software support. (BTW - I use a Fireface 800)

The big plus for me is the availability of their drivers both Mac and PC and the fact they bring out new ones faster than most of the other vendors.

Intel based Mac, Vista, OSX Leopard - drivers were out within days or even prior to the official launch of the new products. Not many companies in the audio business can say that!

[mplaster]

just wanted to toss in my "vote" for RME, as well.

Ive had a Multiface (original) for years and the thing has been absolutely perfect. Never experienced any latency issues.

>m 

[dpcon]

@cm said:

i'm somehow biassed, but whenever possible i'd choose RME ... their drivers are outstanding for all platforms and the mixer utility is great for internal or re-routing of audio

christian

I agree that this is the best option.