Question about MIDI/AUDIO interface for using with CUBASE

Edde

Edde

New member
Hello musician and producers, how are you? I hope well.

I would like a favor please. I am musician since 1989 but I needed to stop to study design and today I work with it.
But... Since we are musician we never forget it and I want to back to play as hobby. So, I stoped about 8 years and I lost all evolution with computer music.
Today I am trying a CUBASE and I work well with it.
This topic is about the MIDI/ AUDIO interface. I am using in my computer an very old audiophile 2496 but I want to buy or new one. I will use only VSTs instruments, one microphone and an old synthetiser ( Yamaha Sy-77).

So, which one is the best for VERY VERY LOW latency in MIDI ( since I will use lots os VSTs) and with good ( flat) audio response as monitor ?

I saw these ones:
Steinberg UR-44 or
Roland UA-55 quad-capture ?

Thank you in advance,

Edde Edman
 
imgext.pngimgext.jpg

This is a list of various audio interfaces with exceptionally low interface latency.
Focusrite 2i2 being the most latency by about 10-25ms compared to the rest.
 
And do you know the best audio quality for listening ( monitoring) ?

Steinberg? Roland? Tascan? And dozen of other models... ?
 
Apogee
Steinberg
Focusrite[preamps good but more latency basically when it comes to any,ANY scarletts. Everything else yes]
Presonus
Avid I think
Native instruments.[komplete audio]
Heard good things about Roland.
Maybe tascam depends on what particulars.
 
Edde said:
Thank you so much for your reply.

So... the best latency for MIDI is the FOCUSRITE Saphire? And how about the Steinberg UR-44???
Click to expand...

That DAWBench score is the other way around - the bigger the score, the lower the latency. If you want the absolute best performance latency-wise, go with RME.

The audio quality is trickier - there's nothing on the market that actually sucks; everything's at least decent. There's variation in the high-end, but it's expensive and the differences are so small that unless you have a top-notch monitoring system in a top-notch acoustically treated room, you're not going to hear it. In other words: in the price range you're looking at, you need not worry about the converter quality. It's not the best, but it's definitely good enough.
 
krushing said:
That DAWBench score is the other way around - the bigger the score, the lower the latency. If you want the absolute best performance latency-wise, go with RME.

The audio quality is trickier - there's nothing on the market that actually sucks; everything's at least decent. There's variation in the high-end, but it's expensive and the differences are so small that unless you have a top-notch monitoring system in a top-notch acoustically treated room, you're not going to hear it. In other words: in the price range you're looking at, you need not worry about the converter quality. It's not the best, but it's definitely good enough.
Click to expand...

Oh, I see. :O thank you for your reply. Well... I was thinking in buy the steinberg UR 44 for use with Cubase, I wont use multiples external audio to record, I will use more MIDI to control VSts into cubase. But.... I saw the RME ( very very expensive the high level ones and I saw some MOTU.. Which ones you suggest from RME or MOTU for use MIDI and 2 or 4 audio channels? I dont need more than this for audio. But I really need a very low latency because I play keyboard. Thank you so much
 
I saw this one babyface.rme-audio.de/ But is USB 2.0 too like the Steinberg UR -44 ? I dont know what to do. Please, Help me if you want. :) ANd thank you so much,
 
From what I've read, the UR44's latency performance is perfectly fine. It's not quite up there with RME, but it doesn't need to be. It shouldn't be an issue if your system is otherwise well configured & up to the task (ie. you can run it flawlessly with small buffer sizes).
 
krushing said:
From what I've read, the UR44's latency performance is perfectly fine. It's not quite up there with RME, but it doesn't need to be. It shouldn't be an issue if your system is otherwise well configured & up to the task (ie. you can run it flawlessly with small buffer sizes).
Click to expand...
Hello, Krushing, Thank you so much. You are very nice .
Well.... I going to the UR 44. So... I have other question but I dont know if this post is the right place for it. If it is not just tell me and I will delete it.
It is about processors. I make machines, I have an old machine with i7 2600k, chipset z68 and Kingston ddr 1600. I was thinking in update. But I don't know if I will have a good performace with this update. I am thinking in i7-5930K 3,4 ghz ( six cores) or the i7-4790K 4 cores but it works in 4,0 Ghz wihout overclock. I will have a better result over the i7 2600K ?? Or is better to invest in SSDs, external drivers a new CUBASE 8.5 ??? Today I use the CUBASE 5.

Well... thank you so much, I really appreciate you help and the help of all people here.
Edde Edman
 
Last edited:
krushing said:
From what I've read, the UR44's latency performance is perfectly fine. It's not quite up there with RME, but it doesn't need to be. It shouldn't be an issue if your system is otherwise well configured & up to the task (ie. you can run it flawlessly with small buffer sizes).
Click to expand...

Hello, krushung, how are you? I hope well. Thank you for your reply again.

And what d oyou think about theses:
Tascam : Product: US-4x4 | TASCAM
Roland: Roland - QUAD-CAPTURE | USB 2.0 Audio Interface and
Steinberg: UR44Â*:Â*Â*|Â*http://www.steinberg.net/

Whicn one I will have the best sound ( I am not talking about input) I want the best sound in output to monitoring and the lowest latency. Thank you Again
 
Last edited:
Frankly I don't know enough about current-gen CPUs to say anything productive :)

As for those interfaces, the sound quality will be extremely similar. The monitors and the room they're in are going to make 100x times more of an impact than the differences in D/A quality. Latency-wise, there might be bigger differences but I don't have any figures at hand. Maybe try looking for some charts about those? The Steinberg UR line has performed well in the past, but not sure how it compares to the others.
 
Edde said:
Hello, krushung, how are you? I hope well. Thank you for your reply again.

And what d oyou think about theses:
Tascam : Product: US-4x4 | TASCAM
Roland: Roland - QUAD-CAPTURE | USB 2.0 Audio Interface and
Steinberg: UR44Â*:Â*Â*|Â*http://www.steinberg.net/

Whicn one I will have the best sound ( I am not talking about input) I want the best sound in output to monitoring and the lowest latency. Thank you Again
Click to expand...

Thank you. :)

I forgot to mention I want low Latency for MIDI. Because I will use VSTs intruments for synthpop music. So... Between UR and ROLAND UA 55 ? IS the same? Or one of them have less latency? Ty
 
As said, I don't have any exact figures, but from what I've understood, the Capture series performs pretty well too. There are going to be differences, but it's frankly impossible to say which one of those would be definitively faster on your system - the overall configuration of the whole setup will affect the latency figures quite a lot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top