johnnyV
Yes now you've done got all us folks with our old door stop Tascam interfaces all excited thinkin' they might be kind enough to take pity on all our years of sufferin' with crappy drivers and take the time to see if 'n they could be fixated. 
I'd still be using my us1641 if the drivers were just a tad bit more stable. 
Right now it's powering my office computers music playback system. The lights look cool.. 

Sorry, I don't know what will happen with older products whose drivers were handled by companies outside of TASCAM. I'm much less involved with TASCAM than Cakewalk, but that announcement about now doing drivers in-house caught my eye and seems like a very positive development.
 
BTW the new interfaces are not "native" USB 3.0, there's no need for that kind of bandwidth with a 2x2 or 4x4 interface. They're compatible with USB 3.0 so you can use USB 3.0 ports with them.

No AES67 devices?

Anderton
Unfortunately, the market for control surfaces at the price point needed to justify all that sheet metal, tooling, and motorized fader action, let alone software and design, is not very encouraging. It's also clear the world is trending to touch screens...but you never know, anything's possible I suppose.

I'm really surprised I'm not yet seeing more touch-screen developments. Stephen Slate saw a huge opportunity, and is getting the word out on his touch-screen, but he's still short on his vision.
 
When we think of a mixing desk, it's relatively large, with buttons, faders and knobs that fit your fingers (or vice versa). The problem with large desks (and the problem with most modern DAWs and control surfaces), is, they don't fit a single screen or the entire project Control surface. Seriously, they don't. Almost always, we have to use selections like 1-8, 9-16, 17-24 visibility, which I know has gotten old for some. Yet, I've not seen one single case where anyone has begun using the now old idea that the iPhone gave us: Swipe-able screen space. As far as I know, no DAW maker has a GUI that allows you to zoom it in to real-life size (of a real console) and then, swipe around on the console like you would roll your chair around when working on a real desk. Even Stephen Slate isn't doing this yet, I don't believe.
 
Now that 4K monitors are dropping in price and speeding up, it's only a matter of time we'll see these offered in touch-screen for cheap, and imagine having 6 of them in an array to display a touch-screen experience of a life-sized mixing desk!
 
If the control surface market can't justify the materials for an ailing technology, let's get serious!

Excellent thinking, brconflict.

Anderton
Excellent thinking, brconflict.

Yes it is. And this would eliminate the need for drivers for every different surface. It would just be GUI code!

With 6-8 4k monitors that would require more gpu processing power than what it would take to mix the tracks you recorded!

Anderton
I'm currently getting 6.5 ms in / 6.5 ms out = 13 ms with the US-366 at 44.1kHz...pretty comparable to other interfaces on this computer. We'll see what the new drivers do.

If you speak with them let them know that 13ms is horrible.
 
In this day and age a 6ms real life, no make believe, total round trip at 44.1kHz is just about OK and the best appliances are down at or even just below 4ms.
 

So, think of showing up to NAMM with (6) 4K monitors displaying one giant touch-screen Sonar console. hehe.

Missed this thread yesterday...

In-house development of driver's and interfaces is very good news.  This makes a difference in how a company is perceived as it makes much, much easier for a company to be responsive - It pays off in the end. Marketing can only do so much; at some point you have to deliver.

>>I'm currently getting 6.5 ms in / 6.5 ms out = 13 ms with the US-366 at 44.1kHz...pretty comparable to other interfaces on this computer. We'll see what the new drivers do.
 
Keep us in the loop.  I'd be interested in what the new drivers do and if they can get down to 6 ms round trip

mike_mccue

Anderton
I'm currently getting 6.5 ms in / 6.5 ms out = 13 ms with the US-366 at 44.1kHz...pretty comparable to other interfaces on this computer. We'll see what the new drivers do.

If you speak with them let them know that 13ms is horrible.
 
In this day and age a 6ms real life, no make believe, total round trip at 44.1kHz is just about OK and the best appliances are down at or even just below 4ms.

According to this document from PreSonus, that's not possible unless you monitor outside of the DAW (Line 6's ToneDirect monitoring also uses a clever workaround). My understanding is that, again based on the references in that PreSonus article, although 1.0 ms through the A/D and D/A conversion and the low USB buffering of around 2 to 4 ms that's tuned to their specific system can give round trip latency when monitoring through the Fat Channel of around 5 ms (although they later mention that as you start loading up the Fat Channel, you may need to increase to 9 ms or so) that doesn't take into the account the extra time required by the ASIO buffers. 
 
I''m curious which USB interfaces are able to achieve a round-trip latency of under 4 ms, including everything (A/D conversion, USB layers, and ASIO sample buffers) with a decent track count and a few VIs thrown in for good measure. The Avid, Focusrite, Mackie, and Roland interfaces I've tested all gave comparable results to the TASCAM with projects that require a reasonable amount of processing power although of course, if not a lot was going on the latency could be quite a bit lower. Most of the projects needed at least 128 samples. Hence my comment of "pretty comparable to other interfaces on this computer." The best I've seen is RME, which can hit a little over 5 ms due to the really low safety buffer they use (good drivers). I'm not counting PCI devices like the Lynx.
 
Also again according to PreSonus that performance isn't "horrible," but more like par for the course, especially if you need to use more than 64 samples to get something to play back no matter what. They say most interfaces have USB buffering of around 6 ms in and 6 ms out. I don't know what's happening on that level, but I'm pretty sure the folks at PreSonus do. However the article isn't dated, so maybe there have been substantial changes since it was written. But I would venture a guess that sub-4 ms performance is the exception, not the norm.
 

If you speak with them let them know that 13ms is horrible.

 
Well there would be no real point to that discussion, given that those weren't the drivers they developed in-house. I'll see what the new TASCAM drivers do when I get t a chance to evaluate them. If TASCAM thought that kind of performance was wonderful, they probably would have stuck with what they had.