View other reviews for this product:
Micky201 « Big potato »
Published on 12/24/12 at 02:37The characteristics - see website rme
My goal was to make an upgrade to my studio, including a new PC and a new sound card with a level above the previous (M-Audio Delta 66) both in terms of the number of inputs / outputs as quality point of view.
The specifications being:
-Stability
Latency-equivalent to PCI
-A top quality conversion
The preamps-good quality - good suffisemment to make choices is taken
One possibility-control monitors
After extensive research, the UCX is the only option I've found, especially the latency score equivalent to USB PCI. But it was also to include remote monitoring of output level.
UTILIZATION
Installation - trivial.
Stability RME - copy.
Latency with buffer 128 - input: 3.5 ms, output: 3.9 ms -> mission accomplished (used in USB 44.1kHz).
I used the latest drivers and latest firmware.
My machine is beefy: i7 3770, 8GB RAM, SSD, windows 8-64 bits.
GETTING STARTED
see above
OVERALL OPINION
While talking about the principal: the sound.
After reading moultes reviews and opinions on the interest to upgrade its converters. Does ca means? justifies the difference does the price etc ... I was curious to see the effect. Result: the difference is obvious. More details in the sound, more potato, bass and more defined herein. It is as if a veil was regulator. And I want to clarify that the difference is obvious even using the DA only: playing with virtual synthesizers only.
It is important to clarify that my monitors were qualibres depending on the piece of way to obtain the frequency response as flat. I imagine someone trying to evaluate ca with HP stereo, in which case the difference is insignificant. In short, the answer is: ca worth it, but there are steps to respect essential preliminary before making a change in sound card.
My goal was to make an upgrade to my studio, including a new PC and a new sound card with a level above the previous (M-Audio Delta 66) both in terms of the number of inputs / outputs as quality point of view.
The specifications being:
-Stability
Latency-equivalent to PCI
-A top quality conversion
The preamps-good quality - good suffisemment to make choices is taken
One possibility-control monitors
After extensive research, the UCX is the only option I've found, especially the latency score equivalent to USB PCI. But it was also to include remote monitoring of output level.
UTILIZATION
Installation - trivial.
Stability RME - copy.
Latency with buffer 128 - input: 3.5 ms, output: 3.9 ms -> mission accomplished (used in USB 44.1kHz).
I used the latest drivers and latest firmware.
My machine is beefy: i7 3770, 8GB RAM, SSD, windows 8-64 bits.
GETTING STARTED
see above
OVERALL OPINION
While talking about the principal: the sound.
After reading moultes reviews and opinions on the interest to upgrade its converters. Does ca means? justifies the difference does the price etc ... I was curious to see the effect. Result: the difference is obvious. More details in the sound, more potato, bass and more defined herein. It is as if a veil was regulator. And I want to clarify that the difference is obvious even using the DA only: playing with virtual synthesizers only.
It is important to clarify that my monitors were qualibres depending on the piece of way to obtain the frequency response as flat. I imagine someone trying to evaluate ca with HP stereo, in which case the difference is insignificant. In short, the answer is: ca worth it, but there are steps to respect essential preliminary before making a change in sound card.