New Slate interface

    Quote from Michael_dk

    Looks cool for those with larger studios!


    What's really really sharp is the price for the ML-2 microphone, for those of us that already have the Virtual Mic System. At least if the price includes license for the mic models that go with the ML-2.


    I was thinking the same thing until I saw that it has no other I/O options. Just 8 analog. No SPDIF. No ADAT. You can chain up to 6 units, but you would not be able to reamp using the Kemper SPDIF, for one.


    Kind of silly imo. What's the point of an interface with just analog inputs?


    I read on gearslutz that they are thinking of offering an "add-on" digital input option. Sheesh, starting at $2k, running to $3k with six mics and then the added cost of a I/O card?

    The thing is 'though, AJ, that the preamps are the same as the one that's part of the VMS. This means that as long as you use the ML-1 or ML-2 mics, the combination of them and the preamps are exactly what Slate used as a baseline for its mic modelling. This means that all the VMS mic models as well as the preamps will be fully-accurate to Slate's spec should you choose to run the plugins, which is the whole idea, really.


    I thought the company would release a 2-channel version of the preamp first, with something like this multi-in, expandable interface further down the track. Perhaps the 2-channel "interface" is yet to come; it should be a 2U preamp with DI ins, VU metering and whatnot, that just happens to function as an interface too, is my guess.


    Anyway, I wonder if this new-fangled interface features universal XLR jacks. If it did, don't discount its utility for synths and whatnot. The instrument inputs (it has them, no?), would be terrifically-pristine if the feedback I've heard about plugging guitars and basses into the existing VMS preamp (the wedge-shaped thingy) are anything to go by.


    As for the price, well, if you watched Steven's infomercial-style video on it, you'd appreciate that the converters, op amps and other components are pretty-well top-notch and as good as you could hope for. I noticed Slate beat MOTU by 1dB at 124dB dynamic range as opposed to MOTU's 123. Mind you, you get 16 analogue ins and outs plus ADAT / S/PDIF (and various other configurations) for much less of an outlay with the MOTU gear, for what I assume is essentially the same beyond-reproach sound quality.


    My take is that unless you need to track more than one mic at a time, one would be better off with the initial VMS package, comprising the single preamp and ML-1 mic. The ML-2 could be purchased and swapped over with the other mic as and when required.

    Watched the Slate dog-n-pony show yesterday - seems like a very expensive, bare-bones Thunderbolt audio interface that would be uninteresting were it not for the supposedly audiophile-grade components and support for their newly cost-reduced Virtual Mic platform. Ties in to their Everything Bundle subscription plan, of course - Slate just can't stop talking about that. Remains to be seen whether they'll open up their newly cost-reduced virtual mics to work with generic audio interfaces or not.

    Quote from Monkey_Man

    My take is that unless you need to track more than one mic at a time, one would be better off with the initial VMS package, comprising the single preamp and ML-1 mic. The ML-2 could be purchased and swapped over with the other mic as and when required.

    I totally agree, good sir! For those of us who are a one-man operation, the VMS is the way better option. 8 inputs are totally overkill. And as I am in the habit of saying, as long as you have DECENT converters, you're golden :) That extra dB (from 123 to 124) is kind of ridiculous in my opinion (at least if it stood alone).

    Quote from dhodgson

    Watched the Slate dog-n-pony show yesterday - seems like a very expensive, bare-bones Thunderbolt audio interface that would be uninteresting were it not for the supposedly audiophile-grade components and support for their newly cost-reduced Virtual Mic platform. Ties in to their Everything Bundle subscription plan, of course - Slate just can't stop talking about that. Remains to be seen whether they'll open up their newly cost-reduced virtual mics to work with generic audio interfaces or not.

    My guess is "no chance in hell". It would severely undercut their profits. I think they've been working the VMS stuff for a LOOOONG time, and spent tons of R&D money on it. I think the "cost of entry" (ie. the VMS preamp) that they recoup their money on. Alternatively, they'd have to jack up the prices of the mics themselves (which seems to not be the way they're going).

    Quote from Michael_dk

    I totally agree, good sir! For those of us who are a one-man operation, the VMS is the way better option. 8 inputs are totally overkill. And as I am in the habit of saying, as long as you have DECENT converters, you're golden :) That extra dB (from 123 to 124) is kind of ridiculous in my opinion (at least if it stood alone).


    Exactly, Michael, which is one reason I mentioned it. Slate's obsession with "beating" the competition is bourne out with that 1dB IMHO; it's as good an example as ever. Notice how he compared the pricing to the Apollo, but neglected to mention MOTU? That's cause their comprehensive, inter-changeable range is a helluva-lot cheaper. Thunderbolt too. Now sitting at around 10 flavours of interface configurations, expandable to ridiculous channel counts and latency figures like 1ms over 500 metres or something like that.


    My guess is that Slate will introduce a bunch of flavours too and "do a MOTU" with a similar modular system. He must've noticed that there's really nobody else doing what MOTU's done with AVB and its huge range of interface and expandability options, particularly at such a sound-quality level and great price, and therefore concluded that it's best to jump in right now while the going's hot.


    Quote from dhodgson

    Watched the Slate dog-n-pony show yesterday - seems like a very expensive, bare-bones Thunderbolt audio interface that would be uninteresting were it not for the supposedly audiophile-grade components and support for their newly cost-reduced Virtual Mic platform. Ties in to their Everything Bundle subscription plan, of course - Slate just can't stop talking about that. Remains to be seen whether they'll open up their newly cost-reduced virtual mics to work with generic audio interfaces or not.

    Agree with all that, mate.


    One thing 'though - there's no stopping anyone from using his or her "own" interface, preamps and mics and then applying the mic or preamp models; the audio stream produced isn't tied to the plugins in any way. Obviously, for best-possible accuracy, one would ideally want to use the mic/s and preamp that Slate used when coding the models, which of course are the VMS ones and the equivalent preamps on this new interface.


    As far as interface choice is concerned, that's far-less of an issue. Even Slate would admit that any "modern", reasonably-flat one will do. To be clear, I'm talking about convertors only here; the standard line-in interfaces. Mic and stand-alone preamp responses are generally tweaked for various marketable characteristics and mojo, however, rendering them inappropriate as signal converters for the VMS, which relies on a known, flat-response baseline for its modelling algorithms.

    With my interface, I could buy any set of quality preamps and just hook them up using ADAT. The company is shooting themselves in the foot by limiting the I/O. One of the things pointed out on the gearslutz thread was that for people who want to reamp the Kemper or Axe FX digitally, they can't do that. It's a glaring omission in my opinion. The interface ticked a lot of my boxes till I saw that you couldn't reamp with SPDIF.


    Also, what you pointed out about the FX not being burnt into the recording signal is both a plus or a minus, I think. After using the Kemper, I'm totally convinced with the benefits of reamping. But being tied to an "everything Slate" bundle to do it just doesn't seem like a good idea to me. Granted, you could always export the processed stems. But that kind of defeats the purpose.


    Also, it doesn't use a DSP like the Universal Audio stuff, it's a plugin and that will add to your system overhead and add latency.


    I'd also like to know if it has a word clock input, an interface without one cannot be considered professional imo, especially if you have a big studio where everything needs to run to a rock solid clock.

    Well, all the Slate plugins have near-zero latency; they actually claim zero, but I don't quite buy it. As for CPU hit, I think Steven covered that pretty well in the infomercial, AJ.


    Agreed about the ADAT / S/PDIF thing. That's one reason I mentioned MOTU (yeah, it doesn't take much LOL), 'cause practically all their configurations (if not all) sport S/PDIF / ADAT on their rear panels. As you suggested, it should be a given.


    Slate will obviously provide it in an all-digital I/O interface at the very least. I mean, he'll have to offer one seeing as MOTU always has, both for it's older PCI-based AudioWire systems and the newer AVB line. :D