Connectors for Audio Interfaces

Are you getting lost in the variety of connectors available for audio interfaces? In that case I would like to pull your attention towards a recent Sound on Sound article once more. The article ‘Making a Connection’ is found in the August 2015 issue. It compares the specs of different connectors. I’ll comment and add my own reflections in this post.

Some topics covered in the article

-       Bandwidth: the article addresses the difference between theoretical and actual bandwidth for connectors. (Ever found yourself in a FireWire vs. USB discussion?—this article brings technical clarity to the argument.)

-       Generations: what is backwards compatible? –and what are the grey zones you need to look out for.

-       Latency: Why your old FireWire devices may still be faster than many USB-devices and how USB3 is improving.

-       Thunderbolt: an overview over generations and current/ future development.

“For people buying right now, I’m afraid the market is in a state of flux as the various standards evolve.”

=Pete Gardner, Sound on Sound=

Thoughts and trends

When I held my first studio-job we were still recording on tape. In the early 2000’s I would book a studio if I needed to get things done. In the mid-2000’s I bought my first interface and the market has evolved a lot since then. Some trends right now are:

-       As the quote above states, the market for multi-track interfaces is more complex than before.

o   As higher track-count has developed for USB, it has taken market from FireWire.

o   The USB standard in particular, has very different performance between different generations.

o   FireWire is still very much in use on interfaces, but not much on computers. This makes compatibility to Thunderbolt important and the long-term future of the standard is uncertain.

o   PCIe is increasingly less relevant in the semi-pro market thanks to connectors like Thunderbolt, mostly the pro-market remains (notably, Avid).

o   Network plugs (RJ45) have become an important contribution to multi-track audio recording (through the Dante-standard). This is natural as it is found much more frequently than Thunderbolt across all brands and types of computers. Focusrite, a major name in FireWire-interfaces, seems to be making a transition into:

-  Network-plug (RJ45) for large-scale professional audio interfaces

-  Thunderbolt for semi-pro and smaller professional systems

-  USB for consumer and some very compact pro-end systems

-  While they still make FireWire-interfaces (and ensure its compatibility with Thunderbolt), these will probably be phased out over the coming years

Focusrite Clarett with Thunderbolt connectivity

Reflections and Prospects

FireWire

I have been a huge fan of FireWire for a long time. It provides solid track-count and crucially, low latency. But does everyone need this low latency? The answer is, no. Low latency is needed if artists are listening to themselves through a DAW while recording. If you work mostly ‘in the box’ and hardly record acoustic performance you may be less interested in latency. Similarly, if you do live-sound recordings straight off a mixer, latency is not a factor you need to consider.

PCIe

Another standard I have been a fan of is the PCIe; this is because of the high specs it can achieve. As you may have read on this blog before, I was very ambivalent about the new Mac Pro. It is an impressive computer indeed, but it removed the first-choice connector for professional studios entirely from Apple’s products. Connection to PCIe can still be obtained through an adapter (more things to buy and store). In Apple’s defence it could be claimed that it is these sorts of ‘leaps of faith’ that sometimes kick us out of the nest so to speak—and makes us embrace another and more modern way of working.

High-end Equipment with USB

When Yamaha released their new 01v96i some years ago they got much praise for the quality. However, the screen and menus seemed old and some of us were surprised of the relative low number of tracks you could record with it (I know this is subjective). Yamaha were clear that they had chosen the USB2 standard to provide good stability and compatibility with a range of computers. Yamaha have some of the most stable digital mixers on the market so the argument makes sense. The choice was still somewhat conservative. If Yamaha’s thinking remains un-changed in the future, we might see a distinction between mixers that can be digitally cascaded or have peripherals attached (ex: hard-drives on a Thunderbolt set-up), and those who can’t do this.

Mixers for Recording

Will all new mixers have multi-track recording-facilities in the years to come? No, I don’t believe so. We will continue to see capabilities from simple two-track USB-recording and up. Mostly because manufacturers don’t want their products compete with their own siblings. Take a brand like Allen & Heath—all Zed mixers are fitted with high-resolution 2in/ 2out USB recording capacity. If the same mixers could record high-resolution multi-track it would undercut the market for their own R16 and GSR24. On the other hand we see a lot of affordable Midas/ Behringer mixers set up with some sort of multi-track capacity via FireWire or USB (caught speed after Behringer bought Midas). This, together with the low prices is clearly a move to take market shares, and if successful it could force other manufacturers to provide similar capabilities at the same prices.

Midas Venice F32 with full FireWire connectivity (48kHz/ 24bit)

High-end mixers is another field entirely. I don’t believe expensive digital mixers will be made without the infrastructure to record digitally in the future, but that infrastructure will have to be flexible and not locked to one connector. A current example is DigiCo-mixers supporting MADI-standard and Yamaha with expansion slots for a variety of connectors. You will have to buy expansion-cards and interfaces separately, but at this budget it should not be problematic. Product infrastructure and flexibility is more important than having an affordable pre-installed connector that would be limiting your connectivity options.

DigiCo SD7

What will the future of connectors look like?

-       USB & Thunderbolt for small-scale systems, home-studio owners and semi-pro equipment.

-       Thunderbolt & RJ45 for larger scale pro-end systems (I don’t include MADI, lightpipe or similar here, as these will need another interface to connect to the computer). USB might be added to the list if the standard keeps developing, but it will currently be better suited to semi-pro applications rather than pro, when track-count and latency matters.

How fast will the transition away from FireWire, USB 1 & 2 and PCIe happen? It depends; here are a couple of thoughts:

-       Manufacturers will still differentiate their products into different price-brackets. Currently, this means you are likely to pay more for a Tunderbolt-interface than a FireWire or USB-interface even if they are of comparable quality (Thunderbolt is still a buzz-word). When Thunderbolt-equipment becomes more common, the price will slowly decline which will again increase the amount of users—eventually it will take over for FireWire and partially for PCIe. Thunderbolt and the Dante-standard on the RJ45-plug will be the two main competitors in high-capacity audio interfacing.

AVID will keep producing their PCIe cards for a while longer, but they will be increasingly challenged by the likes of Focusrite and Universal Audio who use RJ45 and Tunderbolt. Eventually, I can imagine even Avid dropping the PCIe standard, but have no idea when.

Conclusion

The market will remain in a ‘state of flux’ for a while still. A lot more products will be available at sensible prices in a few years—when the period of ‘flux’ is over for this time. For a good read on the status of the available connectors, do check out Sound on Sound’s article. Hope I have provided you with some food for thought!

(Photo Credit)

Where is Apple Going?

Two new developments from Apple have lately caused the audio-community to question how dedicated Apple is to their pro-audio users. Here are some thoughts on Logic Pro X and the new Mac Pro. 

1. Logic Pro X

The new version of Logic Pro can only be bought through Apple’s own App Store and the user interface has been simplified. The changes to the interface has left many Logic Pro users wondering if they were to end up with a pro-version of Garage Band. One of the main concerns have been whether Apple were to remove pro-functions that are not used by the average consumer. Judging from Sound on Sound’s reviewof the new software it seems like most functions have been maintained, but some have been moved around within the interface. This may even improve the workflow when you get accustomed to it, but for pro-users it also means that they might have to sit down and re-learn a few things.

Once upon a time Logic was a MIDI-sequencer and ProTools was an audio-sequencer. Their cousin Cubase integrated both these functions to a complete audio- and MIDI-editing package. With time Logic and ProTools became the first choice of music producers, providing either a focus on audio or MIDI. Cubase always seemed to be more attractive in the semi-pro marked. Recently the tables have been turning. Steinberg (that makes Cubase and Nuendo) has seen a distinct increase in their sales over the last couple of years. When I talk to representatives from both Steinberg and AVID (ProTools), both can confirm that they are getting new pro-users from Logic’s old customer group. With the recent 64-bit ProTools 11 and the mildly astonishing 7^th generation of Cubase we have better tools available than most could have dreamt of just a few years ago.

Where does this leave Logic? As an App Store download, with its attractive pricing and with its simplified work environment we all knew Apple was aiming more towards the average consumer and first time home studio owners. We also know that both ProTools and Cubase have gained a number of pro-users lately, many of which would have jumped ships from Logic. But the scene is maybe not as gloomy as first feared. Do you need to mix on the run while you travel? Do you record with your artists in their living rooms, maybe even in different cities? Then the prospect of a MacBook Air with no iLok or eLicenser (in crumbly plastic) with endless updates you have to have to run Cubase may seem very attractive. Also, if you produce music and need a fast workflow but rarely any deep processing the new Logic could be the way to go. This could for instance be the case for anyone programming and producing, but not mixing their own material. Another group that would enjoy the reduced prices and easy download is the education sector. Both Steinberg and AVID are big on education and they both offer upgrade/cross-grade programmes, something Apple has dropped for Logic Pro X since the software is already quite affordable.

Mark Wherry in Sound on Sound wrote these words in his summary of Logic Pro X:

“Logic Pro X introduces a new interface and a large number of powerful, inventive and musical features, but not all existing users will feel their needs have been met with this release”

 

I think that sums up both the pros and the cons very well.

2. Mac Pro

Steve Jobs passes away and Darth Vader takes over?

 

Welcome to the new Death Star.

  

If you have mixed on a laptop or an overloaded desktop for more than five minutes it would be easy to agree with Apple that thinking new about computer cooling is a good idea. However, getting rid of the whole cabinet of arguably the most professional machine for the creative industries over night is a less good idea. Let’s picture this: you own a studio with AVID converters, PCIe expansion cards and a stack of inbuilt hard-drives (system disc, synths, audio, video etc.) but your computer needs replacing, what do you do? Indeed, there are new systems on sale to connect your PCI/ PCIe equipment to the Thunderbolt standard (Ex. Sonnet and Magma), but that means you were just forced to buy more equipment. If you don’t put all the new gadgets in racks your workspace will be less tidy, and who said that discs in an external cabinet or on the desktop is less noisy than internally mounted ones?

Another question is: in a world of over-heated Macs working on maximum power under huge post-productions for film or gigantic multi-channel mixes (really, how many of us have not been working with one eye on the DAW and the other on the CPU meter?); is it actually going to work? Is the new design going to cool down the CPU sufficiently? Maybe it is, but it would be nice to hear it from the audio industry first and not just from Apple.

To provide a little more perspective, this is a part of a larger trend that isn’t all that bad after all. Thunderbolt, USB 3.0 and the Dante Ethernet standard are together going to provide new and really exciting opportunities for audio-professionals in the coming years. When I see the new Universal Audio interfaces and WD discs that can be attached via Thunderbolt I haven’t been as excited since the late/ mid 2000’s. Then we got a whole new generation of multi-channel interfaces (Digi 003, M-Audio ProFire, RME Fireface, FocusriteSaffire, etc.). This especially improved the work-environment for semi-professional studios. When we look at today’s developments (RedNet, UAApollo etc.) it is easy to see that the next revolution is also about to impact the high end pro-audio marked. There will be less need for PCI(e) equipment because of the sheer speed and capacity provided in a modern computer’s com-ports.

Does this justify Apple’s over-night discontinuing of the old MacPro? For users with high-end expansion card equipment the answer is no. The new direction Apple is taking is coming anyway, but new standards needs more time to get established. If not, Apple is dictating how we set up our workflow and are forcing us to buy a set of third party equipment that we really have no need for in the first place.

Again, I’ll let Mark Wherry in Sound on Sound sum it up:

“[Especially for users] in larger studios and post-production facilities, the second word in the Mac Pro’s product name will seem more Project than Professional.”

I need a Mac Pro upgrade, but what to buy now?

I’ll make four suggestions for you:

1.     Get an old Mac Pro that’s a couple of years old and not very much used.

2.     PC’s are getting better than ever before. Especially if you know how to build your own computer and can run Linux or a similar OS with a minimum of clutter you might both get a solid solution and perhaps even save some money.

3.     Embrace the new technology and go for a new Mac Pro or an iMac.

4.     Wait or find an interim solution. There’s likely to be a well of new products on the marked over the next few years. By the time there is a second generation of the Mac Pro (initial bugs fixed, more knowledge about if the cooling works, upgrades etc.) there will also be a lot more interfaces, discs, hubs and other peripherals on the marked. They will let you tailor your workflow better, give you more quality to chose from and force the prices down.

Here is a really informative video from iFixit.com for those who want to see what the new Mac Pro looks like inside. If their conclusion holds it should be really easy to fix, which is a huge plus to its credit: