Any opinions on Edirol UA 1000?

[Unwired]

I have been considering a USB based audio interface and ran across the Edirol UA 1000. This is the only one I have seen using the USB2 interface. Does anyone have any experience with this product? Are there tangible benefits that can be expected from USB2 vs USB1 or is this just marketing hype.

[oops]

I think there is something to do with not being able to record more than 2 tracks at 96khz???? My memory isn't clear on this but it had something to do with usb not having the throughput to record at higher khz. Do a search in Google on "Edirol + usb + 96" and you should come up with some info.
ps I've updated my page and info at http://www.rightwingproductions.com
If you see anything that I should fix within please let me know. Thanks
Oh, and Merry Christmas to all. All the best eh?

[joemix]

Originally posted by oops:
I think there is something to do with not being able to record more than 2 tracks at 96khz???? My memory isn't clear on this but it had something to do with usb not having the throughput to record at higher khz. Do a search in Google on "Edirol + usb + 96" and you should come up with some info.
ps I've updated my page and info at http://www.rightwingproductions.com
If you see anything that I should fix within please let me know. Thanks
Oh, and Merry Christmas to all. All the best eh?

Blah. Not true. The UA-1000 is great. Very stable and yes USB2 makes a big difference. Plenty of bandwidth there, more than firewire, for your higher sample rate recordings.

[oops]

http://musicsoftwaresuperstore.com/shop/item.asp?itemid=384 Link. This looks like a neat unit if it works like its supposed to.
Let us know how it works at 96khz multichannel in. Recording and Playback.
Merry Christmas. Have a good one.
You really should consider an Aardvark. They are so much more superior. Are you planning on using this unit with a laptop??
Otherwise why usb? Just wondering.

http://www.audioforums.com/forums/rolleyes.gif

[joemix]

I've used both, Aardvark (I owned a Q10 for 3 years) doesn't hold a candle.

Try a UA-1000, I guarantee you wont go back to the Aardvark.

Oops, is this what you read? (Review from the Edirol site):

"I was able to record 20 channels (using 2 UA-1000s) for a minimum of 25 minutes before I considered the test successful at 24 bit, 96 kHz on both computers while monitoring through software at only 12% CPU usage with 2 milliseconds of latency. In recording terms, it’s rock solid."



[This message has been edited by joemix (edited 12-13-2003).]

[zerog]

well, even usb 2.0 isnt as good for low latency audiovisual stuff. Firewire is better designed for this application.

Also, at the price of the UA-1000 (around 650 usd) for another 50 bucks you can get a motu 828mkII which is a much better choice for pro/semi-pro use.

[joemix]

Not true. softsynths work great with the UA-1000. Latency is virtually undetectable. I don't guess you'd know though if you've never used one.

I've also used Firewire interfaces, and I'm not sure I'd trust a MOTU product.

USB 2.0 has matured since its inception http://www.audioforums.com/forums/smile.gif

[Unwired]

oops:

I did indeed buy a UA1000. It is great. Sound is awesome and the drivers seems to be rock solid. I love the portability being USB. I can bring it to a friend's house and fire it up on his PC to do some work with him and then bring it home and finish up on my own PC. USB 2.0 has plenty of bandwidth. We have not tried recording more than 4 channels simultaneously but I don't think it would be a bproblem.

[Novobee]

I got echo dj 2 stereo output, pcmcia is lightning fast and more reliable than usb. 2ms latency on every audio apps, no glitch ever.