batsbrew

azslow3

batsbrew
maybe bandwidth isn't an issue now.
but a year from now?

Only in case the number of inputs/outputs will magically increase within the year or they start support 64bit/1MHz sample rates...
 
But in case the specification in your signature is still correct, USB2 bandwidth is not the bottleneck 

HEHEH,
 
yea, 
but i'm still cranking out tunes, no problem, with good ole sonar 6PE and win xp on an old timey machine......
so, there's that.
 

You Sir are not good for business!!! Capitulate.
 
Rocky

batsbrew
why not make it usb3?

Other than using a different cable, what would the real-world difference be? RME state their products all work correctly when connected to USB3 ports (many interfaces don't) amd as for bandwidth I can run 20 24bit/44.1KHz mono inputs into Sonar and monitor several of them via track echo with plenty of USB2 bandwidth left over.
 

batsbrew
still haven't heard a good argument against it...

There's no compelling argument for it either. Compatibility with USB3 sockets is an obvious must, but in terms of bandwidth there's no particular problem with USB2. Unless you want to record a huge number of tracks at the same time perhaps, in which case you're probably a commercial studio or otherwise well enough funded to run several interfaces or go down the PCI card+multiple ADAT units road.

No doubt manufacturers will eventually move towards USB3 but the interfaces would still need to function with USB2 to meet the USB spec. Though some USB2 interfaces don't actually conform to spec, which is one reason many work with USB2 sockets but are dodgy with USB3.

There's also the arrival of Thunderbolt to consider. As/if Thunderbolt becomes more commonplace and prices drop it might be better for a manufacturer to support that rather than develope an interface to USB3 specs.

then why does usb3 exist?
 
especially if no one is using it?

This looks pretty cool. He said retail should be about $749 EU and should show be available around June.
http://www.soundonsound.com/news?NewsID=18292
 
Rocky

batsbrew
then why does usb3 exist?
 
especially if no one is using it?

audio recording is a very small market comparatively.  USB3 is good for faster data transfer for USB drives, Video capture, blueray players...etc.

Currently that 749 euros = $806usd, so $799 might just be the US price. The video was cool. Thanks for that one Rocky. For as short as it was, it was quite informative.
 
Michael

then why does usb3 exist?
 
especially if no one is using it?

 
I use it all the time with hard drives.  I love the "speed."  Of course speed is not the right term.  More data at once (bandwidth) is more accurate.  I can run 30+ channels of 192kHz audio with my RME UFX on USB 2 at low latency.  It would not be any faster with USB3, Thunderbolt, Ethernet, or Magical Voodoo.  
 
RME does use USB3 with their 394 channel  Madiface XT.  That one probably needs it, so they used it.  
 
That is what is great about RME.  They don't try to trick you with gimmicks like two channels of thunderbolt audio, they just offer practical, high performing gear.   

The new look is nice, however I would think cables sticking out of each end of this thing would make it a little unwieldy if you plan on keeping it in a studio
 

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking, too. Where would I put it and be able to use it with the "octopus thing" sprawling on my desk.
 
Michael

batsbrew
then why does usb3 exist?
 
especially if no one is using it?

 I feel that way about Thunderbolt. You can find more computer hardware with USB3 than TB.