Since technically I don't NEED anything else let me rephrase: if I get an awesome custom machine, will a separate quality ad da unit be able to do anything that the computer can't?

The simple answer is yes. The computer still needs an interface to provide the I/O to the analog world.

I see. So when one buys a unit just for conversion what are they paying for that their interface'a stock converters can't do?

Most computers only come with a sound chip suitable for audio playback. If you intend to purchase an audio interface designed for DAW use as part of the "awesome custom machine" that should be sufficient.

Edit

Hi all:
There is no such thing as a resurrection of AArdvark.
What he meant is the new Antelope Orion 32 channel in and out for 3K.
Go to Gearsluts and search for this item.
The people at Aardvark are now at Antelope.

dan

ASG,

I think you are confusing things.  The computer runs handles digital effects, spooling audio and everything else inside the box.  It receives timing info from the interface.  Interface usually means a combination unit of converters w/ a clock, maybe preamps and definitely a means of digital outputting to the computer.

Your saffire includes all three of the above items.  The audio comes in and is converted (and the clock makes sure all the digital bits are lined up).  If you use a mic the preamp converts a mic level electrical signal to a line level signal so the saffire can "hear" it.  It uses USB to send the digital bits (lined up correctly) to the computer so your DAW can manipulate it in the box.  And then the manipulated signal goes back out to the saffire, is converted to analog and on out to your speakers.  THe computer and the interface are two separate entities, tho not closed.  You upgrade the computer for more realtime manipulation (we used to have to do anything cpu intensive off-line).  96 k recordings do twice as much computation as 44.1.  While the interface simply turns the digital ones/twos from the computer into audio.

Some "interfaces" are merely converters (w/ the attendant clock).  Like the Lynx Aurora.  It is a separate rack unit w/ converters in it and a card for outputting the digital info.  It can be AES but your computer needs a card to plug those cables into (and Lynx makes a good one).  Or it can output over FireWire or USB.  It does one thing and one thing only - convert analog to digital and send the digital out.  You would need a separate preamp to record a mic well (at most you would get a weak signal from a dynamic).

A faster computer will let you manipulate higher rates and pile on more effects in real time.  A better interface/converter would provide (hopefully) better ADDA conversion, but  most of us agree your bang for buck on the purchase would be small.  Unless you go to the very high end like Burl or Prism etc, and then you need a very good system to get the most of it (monitors, outboard etc.).

From what you described, if I was you I would make sure that I do hear the difference between 44.1 and 96 by blind testing.  If you can hear the difference 70-80% of the time, get a new computer to run the higher rate first.  If not and the saffire meets your needs now (number of inputs etc.) I would invest money in a mic, or room treatment, or a preamp before I upgraded the converters.  But remember, it is a system.  It makes no sense to convert audio that you can't hear because your speakers aren't good enough to show the difference or your room has big flaws.  But as you work on the technical side and your ears get more experienced and your mic placement technique gets better, you will learn where the flaws are in your system and be able to improve those.  A consistent upgrading in step w/ your audio education is the way to go, along w/ buying the best equipment you can so you aren't throwing it out the next year as you graduate from good sound to great.

@

dan le


Hi all:
There is no such thing as a resurrection of AArdvark.
What he meant is the new Antelope Orion 32 channel in and out for 3K.
Go to Gearsluts and search for this item.
The people at Aardvark are now at Antelope.

dan

Hunh...that's interesting. I didn't know the Aardvark folks went to Antelope. I used to own a Q10 years ago and now I have an Antelope Orion sitting next to my Lynx Aurora. Odd how that turns out.

To the OP, I happen to own a few converters, including some fairly nice ones, and the thing to keep in mind is that they really are one of the last things I'd look at. Here's why: If I have a cheap acoustic guitar which I record that in an untreated room, through a $90 mic followed by a trashy preamp and then through a Lynx HiLo, it's going to sound like a really precise recording of a cheap guitar in a bad room through a bad mic and pre. Until you have the rest of the signal chain up to snuff, you're just recording sub-standard things really really well.

If you have that other stuff covered, start looking at higher bit rates or converters, but probably not till then. 

AT has it exactly right (and certainly needs no help from me), but the thing to remember is that the computer doesn't have anything to do with how your conversion works. The computer deals solely with 1's and 0's. The converter takes those 1's and 0's and turns them into sound. Changing one doesn't affect the other.

Good luck
Dean

I used a M-Audio Fast Track Ultra for 5 or 6 years and in November 2012 upgraded to an RME Fireface UCX.

The RME UCX is significantly better than the FastTrack Ultra.
Converters, noise-floor, clock, etc... (all reflected in the cost)
I have no doubt you hear a difference.
RME makes great audio interfaces.  Not an inexpensive option, but the kind that'll last 10 years... and you'll never give it a second thought.

Jim,

In my post, I was trying to say that the Fast Track slaved to the RME sounds better than it did by itself (or seems to). I'm not sure if this is real or just my guess work. I haven't actually A/B'd recordings of the Fast Track where it was slaved vs the Fast Track alone.

I do love my RME UCX. It's addictive. I like the accompanying tools for direct recording in a single file, vector scope, etc... and the FX built in to the unit are pretty great too.

I've also successfully used the UCX to make a recording booted to Linux Ubuntu Studio - DAW was Ardour. I had to use Class Compliant mode, so there was no interface for adjusting Routing internal to the UCX, but it did work. I just had to use the single pot on the device to adjust the input levels of each track.

I didn't use Linux because I want to move away from Sonar. I love Sonar. I want to get a nice desktop for mixing. My laptop is at it's end of life. I am hoping to be able to use my Work Laptop to make field recordings when I want to. Linux and the RME may enable this. I will say it would take RME making TotalMix work on Linux for me to let go of my current laptop. But with Total Mix and Linux, I could make great field recordings using my work laptop and bring them home to mix on my beefy Windows desktop running Sonar.

The fact that Windows prevents me from making a USB device a bootable OS is what is pushing me towards Linux. If I could install windows on a Removable USB device, that would be my path of choice but that door is soundly blocked. I spent a lot of time last year trying to get it to work. Microsoft even made all this fuss about bootable USB devices, but they only allow you to make the Install Disk images bootable. Who cares about that!! Haha. I want a drive running Windows 8 with Sonar that I can boot my work laptop to without having to physically remove the hard drive from my work laptop (a risk I'm unwilling to take to switch between modes).