High End Audio interface recomendation 4 recording kemper?

  • Hi Guys, can any one recommend a high end Audio interface for recording the kemper?
    The more compact the better. Maybe Zoom???


    If any one has any ideas i would appreciate it, ill do some recordings for you guys with this


    Ash

    Have a beer and don't sneer. -CJ. Two non powered Kempers -Two mission stereo FRFR Cabs - Ditto X4 -TC electronic Mimiq.

  • Thanks a lot guys, i am gonna check ALL of them out!
    Really appreciate it guys. :)


    To me, having a STEREO cab and high end recorder really makes the Kemper shine.
    Saving up will be easy as there are no more profiles left for me to buy :D


    Thanks so much Guys


    Sincerely
    Ash

    Have a beer and don't sneer. -CJ. Two non powered Kempers -Two mission stereo FRFR Cabs - Ditto X4 -TC electronic Mimiq.

  • Guys gotta say the other options are great for a budget for their quality (good advice)
    I cant go past that RME man.


    Thats just absolutely killer.
    If i could not afford it i would of gone the other suggestions
    So thats great advice guys and thank you again.


    But beat this man.




    Ash

    Have a beer and don't sneer. -CJ. Two non powered Kempers -Two mission stereo FRFR Cabs - Ditto X4 -TC electronic Mimiq.

  • Knock yourself out Ash:


    MOTU.com - Products


    Better looks, better metering, better convertors *, ridiculous expandability via AVB networking, better onboard-DSP mixing, FX & routing, controllable from any tablet, laptop, 'phone or computer using any web client (Safari, Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Explorer, etc) on any platform - Mac, Windows, Linux, iOS or Android, unbeatable choice of I/O configurations and... IIRC... cheaper than RME.


    MOTU has been making interfaces for 20 years that I can think of, and still supports every model with driver updates, in case obscelecense scares you.


    Let's be clear 'though: Whichever you choose, any additional expenditure will not yield palpably-superior sound quality.


    * Check out this BeerGutz thread where all sorts of tests and debate ensued as the range was compared to many high-end offerings from Apogee, UA, RME et al. The MOTU units always equalled (at least, and that's debatable) or blew the competition away... at a fraction of the price:


    MOTU AVB Thread at BeerGutz

  • Thanks so much Brother , all those high end features and inputs and this dumb ass is only going to use the spdif LOL
    Okay checking out now :)


    Ash

    Have a beer and don't sneer. -CJ. Two non powered Kempers -Two mission stereo FRFR Cabs - Ditto X4 -TC electronic Mimiq.

  • ... the Lynx card I suggested will have better D/A than RME or MOTU...

    D/A Comparison of the Lynx E44 and MOTU 16A, 1248, 8M, 24Ao et al


    Frequency Response
    MOTU --- 20 - 20 kHz, +0, -0.1 dB *
    Lynx ------ 20 - 20 kHz, ± 0.05 dB


    Dynamic Range
    MOTU --- 123dB (A-weighted)
    Lynx ------ 120 dB (A-weighted)



    THD+N
    MOTU --- -110 dB (0.0003%)
    Lynx ------ -108 dB (0.0004%)


    Max Level Out
    MOTU --- +20 dBu
    Lynx ------ +20dBu


    * We're generally not able to perceive level changes below 1dB, so the 1/20th dB difference in the dip values across the response range between the MOTU and Lynx are irrelevant. Note that the MOTU has no peaks, whereas the Lynx does, even 'though they're tiny at 1/20th dB max.


    So, frequency response is a tie IMHO. Dynamic range, THD & noise are clear wins for MOTU and max-juice levels are a tie. MOTU wins, incredibly.


    Mark Of The Unicorn's convertors are in a different league now from what has been employed historically by the company. It's now using latest-generation ESS Sabre32 Ultra™ chips coupled with superbly-engineered analogue circuits (apparently, which amounts to even-better performance overall than if the same chips were employed in less-highly-specc'd environments).


    There's still a lag from what I can tell, when reading across the various forums, between the current reality and perceived efficacy of MOTU convertors in the general audio populous. Your assertion, nakedzen, would normally have been spot-on, IMHO, but there's that lag I mentioned, so I figured I'd set the record straight.


    To be fair, some "tiny" budget units such as the UltraLite, whilst still providing hot +20 dBu out levels, "only" boast a 117db dynamic range... but that still sets a new standard for mobile interfaces.

  • Stupid question, is there that big of a sound difference from the ones suggested as compared to something like a Focusrite Scarlett? Has anyone gone from a lower mid range to an expensive unit? My knowledge on interfaces is extremely limited.

  • It's not something you'd hear on crappy monitors, Ant. Good headphones will, however, reveal differences such as:


    Lower-quality (and older) AD/DA
    Thinner-and-yet-more-tubby bass
    Less-well-defined mids
    Harsher-and-less-extended highs
    Smaller 3D field overall - comparatively-squashed or restricted-feeling


    High-end AD/DA
    Thicker, better-defined bass
    More-accurate-and-believable mids
    Smoother-and-more-extended highs
    Larger 3D field overall - more-open, less-constrained sounding

  • I said "old" because even the best convertors of yesteryear can't hold a candle to the likes of what's out there today. I said "lower-quality" because I was comparing, as "requested", "lower mid range to an expensive unit".


    There's no other way to divide the two "extremes" for the purposes of discussing convertor-quality benefits, IMHO.


    There's also, obviously, no suggestion that your unit's crap; on the contrary, from what I've heard, it's pretty-good. I was simply trying to offer some sort of description as to what the perceived differences might be between mid and high-range convertors, which is what I thought you were curious to know, Ant.


    Practically-speaking, I wouldn't worry about it. Tough to justify minuscule improvements over your interface unless you're making a living out of producing everything in-house.


    Cheers bud.