Why no "High End" Behringer Modeler ...... seriously ?

[pipelineaudio]

That's ridiculously good actually! Gonna check and see if that covers all their bigger products, I would love to put them back into use!

 

[pipelineaudio]

Ahh bummer, looks like its only the small M series stuff that got the good new USB drivers, their professional sized stuff is still the garbage ones

 

[Sedaxel]

Well, they never had drivers for their interfaces. Which is why latency figures have always been bad. And asking your users to go for a kind of "hack" (such as ASIO4All) is quite an offense in my book.

Wrong, mate.

If you take a look of Julian Krause reviews (highly recommended if you´re interested in audio interfaces matters), these Behringers have perfectly useable latencies. They´re similar to the typical interfaces in that ballpark, such as Sacarlett, Audient, etc. Also, on those reviews you can see measured all of the important numbers (dynamic range, preamps self noise, phones preamp, latency, frequency response, THD, crosstalk...), which are perfectly fine. Really great hardware for the price, indeed. Arguably the best quality/cost ratio out there. For me, it´s the benchmark in home audio interfaces. When I´m in the hunt for an interface, I always ask to myself: what gives me this one that a used 204HD (70€?) would not?

A few of my buddies own the 204HD and it´s perfectly good.

 

[bigmenace]

Well, they never had drivers for their interfaces. Which is why latency figures have always been bad. And asking your users to go for a kind of "hack" (such as ASIO4All) is quite an offense in my book.

Wrong, mate.

If you take a look of Julian Krause reviews (highly recommended if you´re interested in audio interfaces matters), these Behringers have perfectly useable latencies. They´re similar to the typical interfaces in that ballpark, such as Sacarlett, Audient, etc. Also, on those reviews you can see measured all of the important numbers (dynamic range, preamps self noise, phones preamp, latency, frequency response, THD, crosstalk...), which are perfectly fine. Really great hardware for the price, indeed. Arguably the best quality/cost ratio out there. For me, it´s the benchmark in home audio interfaces. When I´m in the hunt for an interface, I always ask to myself: what gives me this one that a used 204HD (70€?) would not?

A few of my buddies own the 204HD and it´s perfectly good.

Like many, I myself also started out my guitar recording extravaganza with a UMC202HD, which was perfectly fine regarding latency and wasn't bad sound wise either. Currently my main interface is Audient ID series and while I do get a tad bit better latency on a same system and the sound might be slightly better (subjective) I'd still be fine with Behringer. It does lack routing options though..


EDIT: And It was 63€, which is a bargain!

EDIT2: And to think yes, it did take a bit more tweaking when swapping between different guitars - high output guitars required the pad while low output vintage single coils needed some input gain boost. Nothing impossible though.

 

[Sedaxel]

The UMC204HD also has MIDI DIN ports, and even inserts in the inputs. Not that I find it too useful for my needs, but my point is that it´s really feature loaded for the price.

 

[Sascha Franck]

If you take a look of Julian Krause reviews (highly recommended if you´re interested in audio interfaces matters), these Behringers have perfectly useable latencies.

I know that channel quite well because I was shopping interfaces when I got my new Macbook, finding out that Zoom literally destroyed the UAC-2 with a FW update (I hope to never get close to any of these utter morons...).

They´re similar to the typical interfaces in that ballpark, such as Sacarlett, Audient, etc.

All of which not delivering really good latency values. At least not good enough so I would really enjoy things under headphones.

Also, as said, when the Behringers came out, you were supposed to use ASIO4All. Their drivers came later (could possibly look that up via Wayback machine, just to make sure I'm not hallucinating...).

Fwiw, apart from that, the Behringers are perfectly legit and absolutely decent enough for any advanced home recording needs. But I simply wanted the best latency values available - and in case there hadn't been the Zoom UAC-2 back then and the Motu M2 right now, I would've chosen a Babyface (which I might still buy one day). In fact, I was about to buy a used V1 one, but unfortunately those come with a Hi-Z input impedance of just 500kOhm, something I didn't want to deal with (no idea why RME, such a super reliable company, would do that, given that all typical guitar-suitable Hi-Z inputs are 1mOhm.

Ahh bummer, looks like its only the small M series stuff that got the good new USB drivers, their professional sized stuff is still the garbage ones

That's not true. For instance, their latest 828 delivers quite nice RTL numbers, too (around 4ms at 44.1/32, from what I remember). Maybe already covered somewhere in the murky waters of the megathread @ GS.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Fwiw, these were my findings on the Behringer in 2018:

Gearspace - View Single Post - Audio Interface - Low Latency Performance Data Base

Post 13643516 -Forum for professional and amateur recording engineers to share techniques and advice.

gearspace.com

 

[Sascha Franck]

And fwiw, apparently Behringer had their own drivers back then already, so I was indeed hallucinating (or rather mixing it up with some other interfaces). Not that it'd make much of a difference, but my apologies.

 

[Sedaxel]

Yeah, I get it.

Just saying that RTL is comparable to those units in that price bracket, and even in more expensive ones. That "RTL figures has always been bad" sentence was a bit shocking to me.

Of course there are better units out there... but they´re quite a bit more expensive. I didn´t buy the Behringer, but an EVO4 instead. I get maybe 1 ms faster RTl (which was important for me too) and comparable other numbers (some better, some worse, but more or less in the ballpark). I liked the form factor too. But I could´ve perfectly gone with the 204HD.

 

[Lysander]

For whatever's worth, late last night i gave my UMC204HD a quick latency test via Linux+JACK, and got ~2ms ADC latency (QJackCtl), and ~6ms roundtrip (jack_iodelay) - both excellent results, specially considering this is still a sub-$100 interface. Buffer size was set to 64 samples, and i've successfully pushed that down to 32 in the past.

I need to run the same test on Windows sometime this week, but i've tracked guitars with Native many times, and never felt latency was an issue with this interface.

 

[Sascha Franck]

For whatever's worth, late last night i gave my UMC204HD a quick latency test via Linux+JACK, and got ~2ms ADC latency (QJackCtl), and ~6ms roundtrip (jack_iodelay) - both excellent results, specially considering this is still a sub-$100 interface. Buffer size was set to 64 samples, and i've successfully pushed that down to 32 in the past.

That's in fact pretty good.
But then, most folks don't run Linux (I have actually been thinking about it for a while when Bitwig came along, but no, missing all my favourite plugins would be a no-go).
And then, see my post @ GS, at least back then the increase in CPU usage at lower buffersizes was quite noticeable.

Btw, you did your latency tests physically, didn't you?

 

[Lysander]

Btw, you did your latency tests physically, didn't you?

Yup. jack_iodelay needs input and output to be physically patched, then computes a roundtrip latency for both - it's very accurate.

But then, most folks don't run Linux (I have actually been thinking about it for a while when Bitwig came along, but no, missing all my favourite plugins would be a no-go).

It's a shame how plugin compatibility is pretty much zero, because Linux has become a surprisingly solid platform for audio work otherwise. JACK is great, and provides low-latency routing options not really available anywhere else, AFAIK.

 

[the-trooper]

so I was indeed hallucinating (or rather mixing it up with some other interfaces

Neither, they have that even cheaper line of interfaces (with knobs on top of them if I remember correctly), and they really did have a link to ASIO4ALL driver, on their page, under drivers. Crazy.

 

[pipelineaudio]

That's not true. For instance, their latest 828 delivers quite nice RTL numbers, too (around 4ms at 44.1/32, from what I remember). Maybe already covered somewhere in the murky waters of the megathread @ GS.

Ahh that IS cool! Now lets hope they are stable, unlike their pro series drivers. 828 is kind of a craptastic form factor, but I'm looking to see if they have anything to replace the 896 or 2408 with the new drivers. Bummer they won't update the 896 drivers

 

[bikescene]

Ahh that IS cool! Now lets hope they are stable, unlike their pro series drivers. 828 is kind of a craptastic form factor, but I'm looking to see if they have anything to replace the 896 or 2408 with the new drivers. Bummer they won't update the 896 drivers

The last couple generations of MOTU seems good. I'm looking to add an 828 to my setup in the future. 10 line in/outs plus dual ADAT I/O, SPDIF, and MIDI for $1000.

Their higher end line was expandable through Ethernet using AVB before mysteriously becoming unavailable.

I could see Behringer doing a new hardware modeler. I have more of their newer synth stuff than I care to admit. I think they can make a good sounding product without it being a blatant front panel carbon copy, like with their Deepmind synth.

 

[pipelineaudio]

If you don't need any analog, the RME Digiface USB has 32 channels of adat for 500 bucks. I was looking at the MOTU 8M to sort of compete, but its 8 less adat channels for the benefit of 8 mic pres, but I could still get a Digiface USB plus a great 8 channel mic pre with ADAT for cheaper, and still end up with 8 more channels

 

[the swede]

While you guys are at it I’ll throw in a question. If I want to record my pedalboard and the end pedal (amp sim) has a di out with cab sim. Is that an instrument out that goes to the instrument in on the interface? Or is it better to use a trs->XLR and use the mic input on the interface?

 

[pipelineaudio]

Does the interface allow you to turn off the instrument input and make it a line input? Most Focusrite units for example do this

 

[timbuck3]

Zoom is the new berehnger

 

[Sascha Franck]

Zoom is the new berehnger

Full moon already?