Ur824 for example is 6 years old . Any words about new product line, release date or something?
Dont wait on a new line. Im not
Nope. Here is what is needed in a new one though:
- Better DA/AD
- Sizable CueMixConsole
- More plugins to run in CueMix using its low latency
- Separate phantom on all mic pres, not the pairing with UR824
- Be able to turn off the Cubase extension so it doesnt take over if I want to use the CueMix and not the integration aspect WITHOUT having to Uninstall it
**List is Long
New UR series with Neve ? interesting
hope for more DSP to run more plugins for no latency monitoring in all input and output channels
basically a Digital mixer without faders i guess )
UR-RT 2 and RT 4 only … no adat ,nothing… thats it… just home recording … This is not for pro users … shame
… I have just downloaded the PDF manual for the new UR-RT2/RT4
What a major pitty :
The gloss-ware 'touts s_ome new dsp ( refered to as “SSP2 DSP” )_ BUT the same limitations as the older models :
the unit cannot “print” the REV-X back into the DAW via USB(rev-X is only for monitoring) (well this is how I understood the signal-flow-diagram )
the unit can ONLY
a) use 4 mono (or (1 stereo + 2 mono) OR ( 2 stereo ) Channel-strips into the dspMixer
b) limited to ONLY 1 instance of GuitarFX module into the dspMixer - ( and either 2 mono (or 1 stereo) Channel Strip into the dspMixer )
BUT !! as soon as you make use of the GuitarFX, it is no longer possible to run a channel Strip in all of the “D-Pre” inputs.
Which brings me to another point SB … WHY can’t we route the DIRECT-inputs also via Channel-strip or FX
(eg routing keyboards from the direct-input into the CleanGuitar amp and chorus, as an example_ )
… snip from the manual, page 36 …
Are DA/AD converter so bad in the current line? I find they are using excellent chips. The UR824 is of really great quality.
What is abysmal is the software. Making a new one alone would make the entire line jump ahed in time.
Also, I’m not sure there is no room for improvement in the exterior part of hardware. My audio interface came with a sharp, unrefined screw, and the external PSU broke. I was against the external PSU, but now I understand that it was a wise choice.
But you get Rev-X as a plugin with the interface so you can run the exact same settings as you tracked with in your mix.
… as I understand it : when the plug’ins are being used they are running on the HOST (PC or MAC) and not inside the internal dsp of the UR hardware and so consuming cpu/memory resources etc from the host …
Yes, you’re correct, but I thought the issue was the inability to print the effect - which you can do via the plugin version of RevX.
_…in retrospect I should’ve elaborated in deeper detail, I had specifically said (and meant) “the unit cannot print” .
I was, already aware of the VST plugin (in host) being able to be used instead, but I wanted to point out what I believe to be “miss-leading feature(s)” that are not easily identified up-front, at time of purchase in the initial marketing / gloss-hype-ware.
… as a heads-up to any future consumers that may believe that they can use the on-board rev-X for printing. …
- the onboard DSP revX plugin cannot be printed to the DAW
- that when using the Guitar Plugins, this significantly reduces the number of instances of “Channel-Strip” that can be utilized in the on-board DSP_
It’s not like, for example the UAD-Arrow in how ALL/ANY of Arrow’s DSP effects can be printed (or monitored) via the Arrow’s channel-strip
Interested to know if anything else is on the horizon with more I/O - something that would be an evolution of the MR816/UR824 lines.
With my external pres, I could even make 4 XLR, 4 line and ADAT inputs work. (And 8 outputs)