On 2014-08-27 11:17, Peter Lutek wrote: are you using the original multiface, as i am? if so, wouldn't the multiface II be an option? cheers! .pltk. -- Peter Lutek improvising musician in Toronto, Canada http://peterlutek.com

On 2014-08-27 11:45, Peter P. wrote: interesting point! perhaps one could remove that pot? still, i look forward to suggestions of other replacements... cheers! .pltk. -- Peter Lutek improvising musician in Toronto, Canada http://peterlutek.com

On Wed, 2014-08-27 at 19:11 +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote: The Neutrik and Rean 6.35mm, 1⁄4" jacks neither mono/unbalance nor "stereo"/balanced fit to the jack sockets of some gear. I've got very bad experiences with Behringer gear and btw. the Behringer gear's female XLR sockets don't provide a locking mechanism. Mating cycles and mating reliability seems to be out of style. If somebody should be aware what 6.35mm, 1⁄4" jacks can be used for the ADA8000 please let me know. Neutrick and Rean are a PITA, at least for the sockets of my ADA8000. SATA connectors also suck, even hot gluing old SATA connectors doesn't help much.

I think there is a pcmcia mad I interface now. Should work with Linux. Also there are the fireface 800 and 400 devices that are supported by ffado. They should have what you're looking for. Another option would be the rme babyface, now that it is class complient. I would love to have some recent devices supported under Linux, I believe all of us do. For now I'm sticking with rme stuff. I have the hdsp9652 which is working flawless. Cheers Moshe בתאריך 27 באוג 2014 19:08, "Brent Busby" <brent(a)keycorner.org> כתב:

On 08/27/2014 09:22 PM, Peter P. wrote: no personal experience, but i guess the ff400/800 support is fairly complete by now. check with jonathan woithe on the ffado list to make sure. -- Jörn Nettingsmeier Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487 Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio) Tonmeister VDT http://stackingdwarves.net

בתאריך 28 באוג 2014 18:48, "Paul Davis" <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> כתב: nettings(a)stackingdwarves.net> wrote: complete by now. check with jonathan woithe on the ffado list to make sure. This made me laugh. Interesting what the next technology is going to be. Thunderbolt? USB 3?

On Thu, 28 Aug 2014, Paul Davis wrote: I notice many of the FireWire audio interfaces call themselves Thunderbolt compatible, with an adaptor. I would be interested to know if that adaptor is just for pinout or needs logic/firmware to work. I think that the FW chipsets, like the ICE1712, are all old. I have seen the odd audio interface that says USB3 though (as part of a digital mixing console, if I recall correctly). However, USB3 will be the next set of new interfaces. I am sure that about the time most people have bought a USB3 device (audio or otherwise) a new interface will come out so everyone can buy evrything all over again... It seems about the time I buy a new system, I have to buy all new peripherals too. -- Len Ovens www.ovenwerks.net

On Thu, 28 Aug 2014, Clemens Ladisch wrote: Yes, my meaning was that most FW chipsets seem to be of the same generation as the ICE1712, that is obsolete. -- Len Ovens www.ovenwerks.net

On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 09:14:18 -0700 (PDT) Len Ovens <len(a)ovenwerks.net> wrote: The ICE1712 doesn't have anything to do with FW - it's an audio chip. FW needs a different controlling chip, like a VT6306. You can still get FW cards and even motherboards with it onboard, but it's getting a lot more scarce. I have an Alesis 16 channel FW mixer I use for live work and it's nice getting discrete channels out for recording as a bonus. I think USB3 will become much more of a standard than TB for the exact same reasons that USB2 became much more prevalent than FW. -- ====================================================================== Joe Hartley - UNIX/network Consultant - jh(a)brainiac.com Without deviation from the norm, "progress" is not possible. - FZappa

* Jörn Nettingsmeier <nettings(a)stackingdwarves.net> [2014-08-28 12:03]: Yes, nice comment Paul. I feel I have to keep chasing laptops that have either an express card slot or a firewire connector. Which nicely circles back to my question if there are any settings on the FF400/800 are settable from within Linux, such as, lets say, +48V and switchable input jacks etc. Thanks for all the answers which help to get a good picture of the current not too bright future vision re pro audio interfaces. P

LOADS of laptops have ExpressCard slots! PCMCIA on the other hand you'd be lucky to find these days. Don't think they were ever much more popular for audio interfaces than the newer ExpressCard though anyway, so unless it's about using hardware you already own there is little point looking for it.

My Lenovo X230 for starters, plus most the others I looked at in the T range at the time (just over a year ago.) My internet is far too slow to do any research on today's models. If things truly have changed in just the last year them I'm sorry. Didn't seem hard to find when I was looking last summer/autumn and that doesn't feel that long ago. Well the basic T440 doesn't but it's taken me about 10 minutes just to check that so really am going to stop now. Hope you find something. (Maybe the T540 or T440P??) I remember being surprised when I heard Apple had dropped it from the MBP! Seems maybe that was the start of it being dropped everywhere... :-(

On 08/30/2014 02:15 AM, Kazakore wrote: Thanks, sounds useful. Looks like their Outlet Stores are Europe only, don't see USA as an option. I glanced at their current T540p model; no ExpressCard. T440, no EC. Toshiba - can't tell. Looks to me like ExpressCard is dead. -- David W. Jones gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com authenticity, honesty, community http://dancingtreefrog.com

On 08/30/2014 04:36 PM, Kazakore wrote: Yah, I saw you mentioned the USA one, but the only one I could find via Google and the Lenovo site was the IE/EN one ... Thanks for the link, browsing around on it right now. My church has a Presonus 12-channel Firewire interface we haven't been able to use for several years now because nobody has a laptop with working Firewire. Our main sound guy's ThinkPad finally died completely and we've never been able to make any ExpressCard Firewire port work on his HP laptop (saddled with Windows 7), something about the port/Firewire requiring a proprietary driver that's apparently XP-only. -- David W. Jones gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com authenticity, honesty, community http://dancingtreefrog.com

Well, the Dell E6530 seems to have an EC slot. Currently listed as "temporarily out of stock". Viewing their list of suggested alternatives offers me a bunch of refurbished Dell tablets and models running Celerons. Googling around hasn't found any manufacturers selling laptops with EC slots. HP (junk laptops), Acer, Lenovo, Toshiba - what models do they sell anymore that have EC slots? On 08/29/2014 04:29 AM, Bill Gribble wrote: -- David W. Jones gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com authenticity, honesty, community http://dancingtreefrog.com

I thought we were talking about the future here! The 80s wants its property back!! Also Hi8 is an analogue format so everything in the post is plain bollocks! Maybe you meant Digital8?? Still 15 years old and any tape format is pretty much dead and definitely not the future! USB2 really doesn't perform that less well than most Firewire, especially with the low quality chipsets this protocol often seems to go through (whether the actual Firewire chipset, or the PCI(e) chipset that an adaptor hangs off. Biggest problem is finding a port which isn't shared with other devices, and many internal devices often share USB Hubs/Ports so it doesn't only depend on what you connect yourself. If USB is not good enough for you (higher requirement for number of duplex channels for example) then go the route of PCI(e)/ExpressCard, or wait and see how USB3 develops over the coming months/years, although so far it seems pretty slow.

On 08/28/2014 07:45 PM, Gene Heskett wrote: ..and I think there's a notable point here in the ability to read and write to a device on the chain in realtime is a question of bandwidth regardless of what the media is. -Sam

On Fri, 29 Aug 2014, Kaza Kore wrote: Intel says that nobody really needs that low of a latency anyway in response some sound cards problems with one of their implementations of USB3. (the problem was USB2 cards with USB3 ports which are supposed to be compatable) In recording latency is not the issue it is with live work. For recording latency needs to known and constant and reasonably low for monitoring. I have heard/read people who say what does it matter if you move your head a foot or two closer or father from the speaker? But in live work if the same audio comes from different places it is called a filter. Looking at some of the computers around and their latency spec, there is no reason they should not be able to be used as a live mix engine for FOH except the audio IF is too slow. Often this is because the IF includes an internal router/mixer/effects section which I find useless anyway. Looked at from a different POV, the cost of a digital mixer makes it an atractive audio interface. For ~$2k you can have: - 22 digital i/o (USB as happens) - 16 mic/line preamps - a 16 motor fader DAW control (can be MCP) - 16 digital channel strips with complete eq+ - low enough internal latency for live work - can be used as an on site live digital recorder (18 tracks) - 32 track/channel available (for more money) ( http://www.allen-heath.com/ahproducts/qu-16/ ) That looks very attractive for a small working studio. For specialty mics I would still use a dedicated pre if I could. The presence of eq and other effects in this box should not preclude the use of other plugins in the DAW as these are live related (make an sm58 sound good) and there may be better plugins available in some cases. I am sure there are other digital live mixers around with similar features. -- Len Ovens www.ovenwerks.net

On Sat, 30 Aug 2014, dale wrote: Lets take my ice1712 based device. With jack set -p16 (as low as it can go), there is 3ms round trip: 1ms each way for the ice1712 internal monitor mixer and whatever else routing, plus .6ms each way for 3.2ms. So set -p32 for 4.4ms or -p64 for 6.8ms. Most USB2 IFs can do that fine in a USB2 only world. Some of intel's USB3 inplementations make -p64 for a USB2 unit full of xruns. So the "low" latency I was talking about is somewhat higher than 6ms. Not that many years ago, the norm in computer based audio was sequencing and digital to disk (or memory) recording of audio was a specialist case... because the HW couldn't handle it. Now the HW can handle it and we do much more than just record audio to disk. So maybe the same thing is true here, The HW can't handle it so it becomes special case. The difference (from what I can tell) is that in this case, we seem to be going backwards. Latency is increasing. The reason it is increasing seems to be that someone has decided it is not important. So what might make sense in a very low latency environment, may never happen based on that decision. What I am saying, is that to become standard application, the HW has to be cheap enough for most people to own it. -- Len Ovens www.ovenwerks.net

On 08/30/2014 11:26 PM, Moshe Werner wrote: Whoa. That's just about perfect. And it's only $343 more than my present System76 Gazelle Pro 9 ended up costing, which has only USB connections, no ExpressCard port, and a 2.4GHz (vs 3.4GHz) 4th gen i7. Thanks! -- David W. Jones gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com authenticity, honesty, community http://dancingtreefrog.com

On 01/09/14 16:50, Joakim Hernberg wrote: Yeah there will always be some processing/propagation delay. Too often I swear you just hear people hunting after figure and not even realising once they get the a point the hardware delays are actually going to be larger than the software delays and it's a world of diminishing returns... Dale.

* Hans Wilmers <hanswil(a)notam02.no> [2014-08-27 14:56]: Thanks Hans. How many channels would that mean then? Is there a mixer GUI available under Linux?

H> If I recall correctly, for UCX all the channels are available as H> in: http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_fireface_ucx.php The UFX provides 22 ch. I/O in CC mode. No matrix or hw-mixer. You do get a single 'Speaker' slider in the alsamixer, not sure what it does though. -anders

On 09/02/2014 10:00 AM, anders.vinjar(a)bek.no wrote: I just did some testing with the UFX. I normally do not need specially low latency, so others may achieve other (probably better) results: With jack setup for 8ms latency, 22 channels duplex, I get lots of xruns immediately. DSP load goes to the roof. With jack setup for 16ms (3 periods of 256 frames), 22 channels duplex, I can record all 22 channels without xruns so far (30 minutes). DSP load stays well under 20%. / Hans -- Hans Wilmers NOTAM Sandakerveien 24 D, Bygg F3 N-0473 Oslo Norway tlf: +47 2235 8062 http://www.notam02.no