Please Advise: 6i6 vs. UR-44 (Now With a Field Report)

I'm trying to figure out which of these interfaces to buy: Steinberg UR-44 or Focusrite Scarlett 6i6.
 
I've read all I can find about them, including numerous posts on this forum, and still undecided, so thought I would put the question point blank to you smart people: Which one is better? Here are some details and some questions:

1. I record by myself mainly, although there's always the chance of a visiting singer or player joining in.
2. I play guitar through various amp sims, and all other instruments are virtual: soft synths for piano, bass, drums, strings and so on.
3. I do want the option of recording the analog outs of a hardware synth.
4. I want to be able to use whatever I buy on my desktop and also on an i5 laptop (Windows 8) which has only USB ports (2 & 3), so I have to go with USB.
5. I think both of these devices will let me monitor live inputs directly. The UR-44 has FX you can add to the direct monitor, which always comes in handy with singers, but direct monitoring probably is useless for soft synths or amp sims, right? For that I must go through Sonar and back out to monitor.
6. The 6i6 has S/PDIF in and out. Do I want this? Why? I don't have any other equipment with this feature except the existing PCI card.
7. Will either of these (or any USB interface) coexist with the onboard basic audio drivers on my two machines, so I can play stuff on YouTube or Soundcloud without firing up the new interface?
8. What is the "loopback" feature? Do I need this? Apparently the UR-44 has it built in and switchable, while the 6i6 allows it but you have to patch it with cables.
9. Each unit comes with some freebie software, and I'm all for trying some new FX, but all I really need is a stable driver, so which one has that?
10. Which one is likely to give me lower latency? (One-man studio-only band using mostly virtual instruments.)

I know that's a lot of questions, and a few pretty dumb ones, too. I hope I'm not wearing out my welcome here. In my research mostly what I've seen is folks recommending the interface they happen to own, which is great -- it means they are happy with what they bought. What I'm hoping is that someone out there has tried both of them or done a better technical comparison than I'm capable of, and can point me toward the right purchase. Or if not that, maybe just tell me the most important points to compare.
 
Thanks for reading!
PS: For those on smartphones, my sig looks like this: Sonar Platinum "E"/64 • Win7/64 • i7/2600 • 16GB RAM • M-Audio Audiophile 2496 (PCI) • NVIDIA GeForce 8400GS 

Thanks Charly.
 
Yeah, it looks like you're doing something similar to me, and I'm sure the Focusrite gear is good. It's just that I'm on a tight budget (who isn't?) and I want to get the most bang I can for the buck. I'm still hoping there's somebody with experience with both of these units who can shed a little light on my shopping dilemma.

I have never used either of these, but a quick review of them makes the UR44 look like the superior unit.

1. The onboard DSP for the UR44 has more options/settings than Focusrite's MixControl. It also says the UR44 has amp models built-in, but did not find something quick to look at. If a signal is passing into the DAW, you are correct that the speed of this feature will go away.
2. S/PDIF is a means to pass stereo audio between gear, so if you have nothing that requires this, it isn't really necessary.
3. You can run multiple sound cards in a computer (but will need two sets of speakers unless you are okay swapping cables). Just be mindful of what is set as "default" to Windows (with things all powered on).
4. Loopback is essentially "what you hear" going into the DAW as an input channel. If you do this regardless of method... it is best to MUTE the loopback track as you record it so that it doesn't generate a positive feedback loop on you. Where this is very handy is something playing through Windows with the audio interface online can be sent to/recorded in your DAW - anything your computer can play, can also be recorded.
5. Reviews of the UR44 say the drivers are stable, and I ran across a post on gearslutz of a guy using X3 that has great latency, but then further down says it is less with Live Lite (in the same thread).

   Again, I have not used either specifically, but the onboard DSP alone is superior on the UR44. It is also more expensive and has more pre-amps (which may be unnecessary).

mettelus
I have never used either of these, but a quick review of them makes the UR44 look like the superior unit.

1. The onboard DSP for the UR44 has more options/settings than Focusrite's MixControl. It also says the UR44 has amp models built-in, but did not find something quick to look at. If a signal is passing into the DAW, you are correct that the speed of this feature will go away.
2. S/PDIF is a means to pass stereo audio between gear, so if you have nothing that requires this, it isn't really necessary.
3. You can run multiple sound cards in a computer (but will need two sets of speakers unless you are okay swapping cables). Just be mindful of what is set as "default" to Windows (with things all powered on).
4. Loopback is essentially "what you hear" going into the DAW as an input channel. If you do this regardless of method... it is best to MUTE the loopback track as you record it so that it doesn't generate a positive feedback loop on you. Where this is very handy is something playing through Windows with the audio interface online can be sent to/recorded in your DAW - anything your computer can play, can also be recorded.
5. Reviews of the UR44 say the drivers are stable, and I ran across a post on gearslutz of a guy using X3 that has great latency, but then further down says it is less with Live Lite (in the same thread).

   Again, I have not used either specifically, but the onboard DSP alone is superior on the UR44. It is also more expensive and has more pre-amps (which may be unnecessary).

I am leaning toward the UR-44. Your post kind of confirms what I've been thinking, and thanks for the great research and technical definitions. My old M-Audio PCI card is nothing special and has very limited I/O, but I have a suspicion that the latency is comparatively good vs. modern USB devices, just because it's internal. I play guitar using amp sims a lot, so monitor latency is a biggie for me, which is why I'm dweebing around about this decision. If I could afford a fancy RME PCIe device I wouldn't be asking these questions. There used to be a few affordable PCI interfaces (Echo, M-Audio...) but they are rare these days. I'd like to think it's because USB devices are just as fast, but it's more likely that they're cheaper to make.
 
The amp sims included with the Steinberg are VST effects, I'm pretty sure, not built into the hardware. At least that's the way I read the literature.
 
Regarding the extra "unneeded" mic pres, I've built and rebuilt PCs for a while, and one of the first things I learned is you can't over-spec. Get more RAM than you expect to need, a bigger, faster drive, etc. Together with my early years of recording clueless rock bands on 16-track tape (and wishing I had more tracks) this has led me to my current philosophy of "get more I/O than you think you'll ever need."
 
Thanks again for your thoughtful and helpful response.

Just FYI - Focusrite told me they would have Windows 10 drivers available by the time Windows 10 came out.
 
I have no opinion between which interface to get (sorry) although I am interested to hear which one you choose and how well you liked it.

maximumpower
Just FYI - Focusrite told me they would have Windows 10 drivers available by the time Windows 10 came out.
 
I have no opinion between which interface to get (sorry) although I am interested to hear which one you choose and how well you liked it.

I'm running their beta on Win10 eval. Better than the old driver!

IF YOU WERE willing to pay for a UR44,
i'd step up with a little more, and get the 4 input focusrite 
 

Focusrite Scarlett 18i8

http://www.sweetwater.com.tore/detail/Scarlett18i8

Man, if I ever need more than 2 inputs, I think that 8i8 may just be the ticket.

Rimshot
Larry, have you read all these?
 
http://audiosex.pro/index.php?/topic/13604-steinberg-ur44-vs-focusrite-scarlett-18i8/
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/950975-steinberg-ur44-vs-focusrite-scarlett-18i8.html
http://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=157&t=50168
 

I have now. Thanks! People are lovin' their Scarletts.

musichoo
I just bought the 18i8 yesterday. It was a big upgrade from my older UA25EX. Nice sound and clear. On the mix control a workable size setting was 2ms. I use mainly softsynths. On Splat it displayed input latency of 5.4ms and output 7.4ms with total roundtrip at 12.8ms. My older UA25EX I could managed at little bit better 11 plus ms roundtrip.

musichoo - See, this is what spooks me about "upgrading" to USB. I don't have a lot of features on my sound card (the same Audiophile I see in your equipment list), but under "Driver Settings," Sonar informs me:
 
"ASIO reported latencies (includes buffer and hardware latencies):
Input: 3.1 msec (299 samples)
Output: 3.0 msec (284 samples)
Total round trip: 6.1 msec (583 samples)
...so it looks as if this very nice USB interface is only about half as "fast" as my aging cheap PCI card. I have no first hand experience with a 12.8 msec delay. On paper it doesn't seem that bad, but I don't know if I could play with that much delay. My main instrument is guitar, and I make use of amp sims, so direct monitoring (for "near-zero latency") wouldn't work for me.

I should have stipulated that I get the above readings running at 24/96 with a buffer size of 256 samples. I just lowered the buffer to 128 (don't usually run it that low) and playback was smooth (12-track project) and the total round trip is 3.4 msec.
 
This is making me think I should just shut up and use what I have, and go to a commercial studio if I ever need to record with more inputs.

Rimshot - are you sure about that? That seems awfully low for 256 samples.

Larry - I don't think you're going to like going from 6 ms to 12 ms. I record guitar through amp sits like you, and get 5 - 6 ms rt latency at 64 samples with a PCI card (like you). At 128 samples, it's 7-8 ms but you can hear the lag, if you hear the actual electric guitar strings being hit (vs the amp sound coming through headphones).

I'm going to bite the bullet (I hate spending this much on a audio card) and get a MOTU Ultralite AVB or RME fireface UC. Jim Roseberry says they both go down to 4.8 ms at 64 samples.

I run my UR44 at 64 samples recording at 24/48. All I do is small projects but it's a great unit with tons of features. I've yet to play with the ability to output 2 different headphone mixes, but I'm sure it will be useful. From what I can tell the 4 amp sims are based on the Yamaha DG series. The included reverb has everything I need and has become my go to.

ampfixer
I run my UR44 at 64 samples recording at 24/48. All I do is small projects but it's a great unit with tons of features. I've yet to play with the ability to output 2 different headphone mixes, but I'm sure it will be useful. From what I can tell the 4 amp sims are based on the Yamaha DG series. The included reverb has everything I need and has become my go to.

John - Are the amp sims built into the hardware, or are they VSTs that work only with the host? That is, can you use them as part of the "near-zero latency" monitoring setup, or only through your DAW?

Just as an observation, we were using  S-Gear, Bias, and TH-2 as VSTs, and they work great at 2.9 ms on the 2i2. At 2 I get some dropouts with everything going. That includes a one track drum loop from EZD. Oh and 128 samples.
 
The new Win 10 beta driver cleans things up a bit. It has 3 choices, recording, balanced and mixing. Plus no more math for buffer size.