Ok. That is yet another argument for me to stay away from Presonus
USB 2.0, 11.1.1
When the hub upstream facing port is attached to an electrical environment that is operating at high-speed, the full-/low-speed hub repeater is not operational. In this electrical environment when a high-speed device is attached on downstream facing port, the routing logic will connect the port to the hub repeater and the hub repeater must operate as a high-speed repeater. In this case, when a full-/low-speed device is attached on a downstream facing port, the routing logic must connect the port to the transaction translator.
and
USB 2.0, 11.4
A hub has a special responsibility when it is operating in high-speed and has full-/low-speed devices connected on downstream facing ports. In this case, the hub must isolate the high-speed signaling environment from the full-/low-speed signaling environment.
Note, that when connecting to the computer directly, you still connect to a "hub":
USB 2.0, 5.2.3
A host includes an embedded hub called the root hub.
The compatibility situation is a more complicated in USB 3+:
USB 3.2
USB 3.2 hosts have both Enhanced SuperSpeed and USB 2.0 interfaces, which are essentially
parallel buses that may be active simultaneously.
but the spirit is the same: low/full(USB 1.x) speed devices should never slow down any high (USB 2.x)/super (USB 3.x) speed devices.
As we all know, practically some USB1/USB2 devices can have problems with USB3 ports. When USB 2 was introduced, there was also some inter-operation problems. All that was/is coming from "bugs" in particular hardware/firmware/software (incorrect implementation of a part of the standard, which was not broadly used at the time the device was developed and so was not observed during tests... we all are people). But it is wrong to use such exceptions as a rule.