Actually FURIOUS.. Need help, Steinberg PLEASE answer, AXR4 tbolt

All about Steinberg's AXR4 audio interface
Norbury Brook
Member
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:40 am
Contact:

Re: Actually FURIOUS.. Need help, Steinberg PLEASE answer, AXR4 tbolt

Post by Norbury Brook »

I didn't get to the studio today and I've been installing a new machine over the last week so not had time for anything.

I'll do the test tomorrow for you if it's quick and easy :D

do I need to physically connect outputs to inputs?

M
ASRock x570 Taichi -Ryzen 3950x-16 core -32 gigs 3600 DDR4- AMD 5700XT- Windows 10 x64-OSX Mojave- AXR4-Euphonix mix,Transport-CC121-Cubase 10.5.x

TNM
Member
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 10:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Actually FURIOUS.. Need help, Steinberg PLEASE answer, AXR4 tbolt

Post by TNM »

Norbury Brook wrote:
Tue Feb 25, 2020 11:56 pm
I didn't get to the studio today and I've been installing a new machine over the last week so not had time for anything.

I'll do the test tomorrow for you if it's quick and easy :D

do I need to physically connect outputs to inputs?

M
oh.. thanks so much!

Yeah, just connect output 1 to input 1.. that's all you need to do.. Put effect on input 1, run the utility.. bob's your uncle! That will answer one of the major questions for me.

I would then ask you, how easy is it to disable DSP mode to temporarily have the device in native mode, to as I said, use a native monitoring plugin I might need, then once that track is recorded to audio, flip it back to all inputs being through the DSP mixer?

If there's no hybrid monitoring, this could be a workaround.

Cheers.
iMac Pro 8 core, 64GB ram, Vega 56, OS 10.14.6, Motu Microlite, Apollo 8, Motif MoxF6, more midi synths :)
MBP 15", 4 core, 16GB ram, 750M, OS 10.14.6, On board headphone out.

Norbury Brook
Member
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:40 am
Contact:

Re: Actually FURIOUS.. Need help, Steinberg PLEASE answer, AXR4 tbolt

Post by Norbury Brook »

TNM, I can't find that RTL program anywhere. The web site doesn't have it on there anymore and I can't find any external downloads or any other tools to do it after an hour of searching.


Any ideas?

M
ASRock x570 Taichi -Ryzen 3950x-16 core -32 gigs 3600 DDR4- AMD 5700XT- Windows 10 x64-OSX Mojave- AXR4-Euphonix mix,Transport-CC121-Cubase 10.5.x

Norbury Brook
Member
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:40 am
Contact:

Re: Actually FURIOUS.. Need help, Steinberg PLEASE answer, AXR4 tbolt

Post by Norbury Brook »

Spoke to Vin @daw bench and he recommended a utility.

The RTL of AD/DA going from an output to an input (loopback) @32 samples is 4.6ms. adding the DSP FX makes NO DIFFERENCE to this delay at all.
If you look at the screen grab you can see there's an EQ and Comp on the tested channel.
RTL.jpg
(640.49 KiB) Not downloaded yet

To bypass DSP zero latency monitoring you just un-check 'Direct monitoring' in the studio/Audio device tab.

M
ASRock x570 Taichi -Ryzen 3950x-16 core -32 gigs 3600 DDR4- AMD 5700XT- Windows 10 x64-OSX Mojave- AXR4-Euphonix mix,Transport-CC121-Cubase 10.5.x

TNM
Member
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 10:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Actually FURIOUS.. Need help, Steinberg PLEASE answer, AXR4 tbolt

Post by TNM »

Norbury Brook wrote:
Wed Feb 26, 2020 2:22 pm
Spoke to Vin @daw bench and he recommended a utility.

The RTL of AD/DA going from an output to an input (loopback) @32 samples is 4.6ms. adding the DSP FX makes NO DIFFERENCE to this delay at all.
If you look at the screen grab you can see there's an EQ and Comp on the tested channel.

RTL.jpg


To bypass DSP zero latency monitoring you just un-check 'Direct monitoring' in the studio/Audio device tab.

M

That's absolutely ridiculous.. Thank you for doing this.. sorry I was asleep, just woke up.

I'm 100% out. No point answering anything else.

I have singers even who won't be able to work with that, they are too sensitive to comb filtering.

Suddenly apollo seems extremely fast. And it definitely wasn't going through the DAW, but the device's DSP mixer only? wow.

Apollo I can keep at 2.2ms total RTL and use at least all the MK1 plugins and that doesn't change at all.

cheers.

PS.. wow.. i just realised apollo with two of the mark 2 latest plugins is still faster than that.

I can put an oxide and 1176 on every single channel and have dsp to spare.. with one apollo. Yet this steinberg interface is the same price.. so it has neve modelling (remember the neve "mode" on the inputs is 100% software modelling), UA has unison. I have some absolutely incredible takes using the neve unison pre on the UA.. I am not going to give UA a hard time about latency again after this. Cheers.
iMac Pro 8 core, 64GB ram, Vega 56, OS 10.14.6, Motu Microlite, Apollo 8, Motif MoxF6, more midi synths :)
MBP 15", 4 core, 16GB ram, 750M, OS 10.14.6, On board headphone out.

Norbury Brook
Member
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:40 am
Contact:

Re: Actually FURIOUS.. Need help, Steinberg PLEASE answer, AXR4 tbolt

Post by Norbury Brook »

TNM, I work with the best musicians in the world, (literally) and there's no latency when monitoring trough the hardware DSP has you can see, the hardware adds none just like RME. This is RTL plus the driver. The driver doesn't come into play when monitoring. I think you're misunderstanding how it works. If there was any noticeable latency the session musicians I use would complain immediately. I had the Head of Warner Bros records sat next to me during the recording of a number 1 album and that was using a UR824 which has twice the latency and again because of the way they work, there's no latency in monitoring, it was a huge 96k project and I had to work at 1024 buffers so the latency was large, didn't matter thought :D

For me the sound quality and total integration is what this interface is about and it's TOP QUALITY in sound build and usability.

the USB AXR is just a little below the RME babyface pro in the table of RTL on the DAW bench Charts. Again no one ever complains about REM total mix latency :D

If I wasn't using steinberg software then the unit would be not as attractive as it's the integration and ease of use that makes the difference when your on the front line with the Head of WB sat next to you :D LOL

good luck with your music and health, health issues really put things into perspective :D


cheers

M
ASRock x570 Taichi -Ryzen 3950x-16 core -32 gigs 3600 DDR4- AMD 5700XT- Windows 10 x64-OSX Mojave- AXR4-Euphonix mix,Transport-CC121-Cubase 10.5.x

TNM
Member
Posts: 240
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2013 10:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Actually FURIOUS.. Need help, Steinberg PLEASE answer, AXR4 tbolt

Post by TNM »

hi well then I think we are both misunderstanding each other LOL cause I thought you were giving me the total latency through the DSP, without the daw loaded. I actually said that.. I asked to just measure it with the console app open, and no DAW therefore no asio driver activated, to know the monitoring latency. I really did, but I must have been confusing the way I asked it, i apologise. 4.6ms through the DAW is perfectly in line with other good USB stuff and just fine. I can find you the utility if you can't find it, you are on windows correct?


EDIT.. misunderstand how it works? Condescending much? It really doesn't matter who you work with, I have one of the deepest understandings of dsp monitoring systems around, having used them since creamware pulsar/pentium 1 days.. I know precisely how it works.
And btw there is no such thing as zero latency.. imperceptible, maybe. But all I am trying to find out is what that figure is (through the dsp mixer) so I can decide for myself. I know what outboard I use and what I can feel when playing that makes it uncomfortable to me.

Yes, I did ask for the "through DAW RTL figure" in my very first post, in a separate question of the 5 questions. This was to know how high the latency is if I needed to switch to native monitoring, since the DSP fx on the device are so limited. This is an entirely different thing and you answered that many posts ago already (thank you), so I presumed your latest reply was regarding the straight, non asio DSP figure which is what I asked, which is why I said "that's way too high". It actually seems you misunderstood me, but I have been continually polite because you are the only one willing to offer any help.. That said, you have been condescending twice now, so don't bother. If you can't see how you are acting superior and looking down on me, then, I can't help you see that, you need to do it for yourself. If I am willing to help someone with something (and I always am if I have access to what they need), I read what they ask and don't belittle them.
Steinberg obviously don't want my money since they aren't answering either and suddenly i have deafening silence on my PMs, so that's pretty much made up my mind for me. I don't need to chase a company to give them thousands of dollars of my money, it is their duty to provide the necessary info. They were all reasonable questions. Why are they so scared of releasing the figures if it's "no latency"? LOL. I already KNOW that's not true, so why not just tell us exactly WHAT The latency through the hardware monitoring IS so the customer can decide?
Trying to get detailed performance info on this interface is like trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip. It's very disheartening.
iMac Pro 8 core, 64GB ram, Vega 56, OS 10.14.6, Motu Microlite, Apollo 8, Motif MoxF6, more midi synths :)
MBP 15", 4 core, 16GB ram, 750M, OS 10.14.6, On board headphone out.

Norbury Brook
Member
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:40 am
Contact:

Re: Actually FURIOUS.. Need help, Steinberg PLEASE answer, AXR4 tbolt

Post by Norbury Brook »

TNM, I'm sorry if you think I'm looking down or being condescending I only mentioned the fact of who I work with as a benchmark and context to say in real use in my working environment then there is to all intents and purposes ZERO latency when using these units in the way they are intended.

Again , I'm sorry I had no intention of being condescending. I went out of my way to try and help. I'm pretty busy here so even finding the damn latency test tool took me all morning and a call to TAFKAT to find the latest one.

I'm sorry no one else has helped. what more can I say?

:D

M
ASRock x570 Taichi -Ryzen 3950x-16 core -32 gigs 3600 DDR4- AMD 5700XT- Windows 10 x64-OSX Mojave- AXR4-Euphonix mix,Transport-CC121-Cubase 10.5.x

ezrashanti
New Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 5:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Actually FURIOUS.. Need help, Steinberg PLEASE answer, AXR4 tbolt

Post by ezrashanti »

Hey there,

Seems this has gotten a bit heated. I felt I'd chime in. I own an AXR4U (usb c version) as well as an Antelope Goliath HD, and I have a commercial studio which runs PT HDX1 with Merging Converters (the best available imo based on rigorous shootouts).

The latency on the AXR with DSP is very close to zero. However, there are two "DSP" bars in the control panel. One appears to be for the 276 comp and neve style EQ. You can use two total instances before it's full, so you could use an EQ and Comp on one channel, or an EQ on two different channels, etc.

The other DSP handles the morphing channel strip, and seems to be able to do about 10 of them (so you could have a more vanilla EQ and comp on quite a few channels. It may also handle the reverb, which if I'm remembering correctly uses about 1/4 of that chip and as an aux effect, remains the same no matter how many channels you send through it.

Steinberg recommended the USB-C version to me and said they had had issues with Thunderbolt drivers on Win10, although that may be worked out at this point. Sadly, I can't chain two of them as I probably would if I could, but I am using a Win10 PC and don't want to struggle with Thunderbolt on it at this time.

I find the sound to be excellent and better than most out there. The latency through the drivers / DAW is higher than I've experienced on RME interfaces, although much lower than very inexpensive interfaces I've tried long ago like Presonus and Focusrite.

I also have a good amount of experience with UAD, including the Apollo X16 (their flagship). I'm not that impressed with the sound of conversion, and my Goliath HD beat it easily in a dry recording shootout on many instruments. I haven't shot out the Goliath and AXR4U.

All of these companies have fanboys and haters. As far as customer service, Antelope gets a bad rap, but has been FAR better than Avid to deal with, and somewhat better than Steinberg (although I haven't had to deal with Steinberg as much). Avid has been a nightmare and currently my PT Dock just doesn't work at all, and I had a console designed around using that, so my whole life is at a standstill because of Eucon and Avid being absolutely horrible in so many ways.

So if you want a lot of channels, I think a Goliath HD could serve you well. They have roundtrip latency of 0.6ms on Thunderbolt, OSX and Win10, with an astounding amount of DSP. You can run 16 compressors and EQs of EACH type, and there are tons of them. You can literally run over a hundred plugins with no latency.

These plugins don't really come into the picture when it comes to mixing, so you have to just consider them available for headphone feeds only imo or it will be frustruating. But you can create 4 independent stereo headphone mixes with reverb and essentially unlimited effects with no latency. The plugins are comparable to UAD in quality.

Antelope is kind of a bad company as well and updates products way too often, devaluing the used price. They will update one tiny little thing like the monitor output converters getting a 3% increase, and then release that as a new product, making it seem like their stuff is throwaway to them. However they do offer a 5 year warranty on hardware which is excellent.

I'm also curious if you were to chain 2-3 AXR4Ts, would you have 3 reverbs, or at least be able to do 6 of the analog emulation plugs and additional channel strips.

Currently I'm between keeping the AXR4U and Goliath HD for home. I got the AXR for the Nuendo integration and 352.8k sample rate support. I wanted to experiment. I've determined it's really tough on the computer and so many things become unavailable (collaboration, 80%+ of plugins, transmitting audio over AES/ADAT, etc) that I'm going to run 192k, which makes the converter decision tougher.

Both of these interfaces sound very very good and imo significantly better than anything UAD has ever made. The preamps on the AXR are definitely better than the Antelope, but the converters I'm not sure yet. Antelope has higher specs and lower noise floor, but Steinberg offers 32 bit integer (only interface that has this as far as I know and I haven't tested enough to see if it makes any difference whatsoever).

The other big deciding factor for me is if I want to have like 7 times as much I/O and leave everything plugged in, the Antelope is a better option for me, while I'll need to incorporate a patchbay with the steinberg.

The DSP and routing on the Antelope stuff has a bit of a learning curve, but it's really pretty easy if you watch a few videos and it's very flexible and powerful.

Let me know if you have any questions.

ezrashanti
New Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 5:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Actually FURIOUS.. Need help, Steinberg PLEASE answer, AXR4 tbolt

Post by ezrashanti »

Oh also, AXR latency through effects (which are quite limited) is lower than Apollo I'm pretty sure. Antelope is much lower than Apollo (best on market including HDX).

Norbury Brook
Member
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:40 am
Contact:

Re: Actually FURIOUS.. Need help, Steinberg PLEASE answer, AXR4 tbolt

Post by Norbury Brook »

:D nice 'review' and i agree with you on your points.

After using mine now on a few projects I'm completely knocked out on the sound of this thing. the AD is just the best I've heard in this class, it's also built like a tank and uses really high end components.

Yes, the latency isn't the best but with the zero latency dsp monitoring it's a moot point anyway. i can run projects @32 sample setting and the other day did an entire project from tracking to mixing using a lot of Acustica Aqua plugins @64 samples the whole way through.

there are a few integration quirks need sorting out but Steinberg/Yamaha are aware of them and will be dealt with at some point.

all in all for me it's a fantastic interface, and on sound quality and build quality I don't think there's anything to touch it in the price bracket.

M
ASRock x570 Taichi -Ryzen 3950x-16 core -32 gigs 3600 DDR4- AMD 5700XT- Windows 10 x64-OSX Mojave- AXR4-Euphonix mix,Transport-CC121-Cubase 10.5.x

Post Reply

Return to “Steinberg AXR”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest