Question about UR 816 C

Please tell me if processing is turned off in the MIX (1,2,3,4). Specifically reverberation. I faced such problem in UR RT4. There it is not disconnected and either on one or the other mix. You cannot turn it off completely.

One more question. I carefully looked at the manual for 816 and it seems that the main output is necessarily duplicated by one pair of line outputs. The question immediately arises: why did they do this? But the main thing is - Is it possible to avoid this duplication? And then I have a desire to refuse to purchase this device.

Hi Eduard
The interface is 8 out and up to 16 in, and the duplication is just a convenience (or complication).
The processing can be turned of, yes.

Correct , mains is always assigned to one of the 4 mixes, so you only have 6 outputs left and not 8…
Forme even worse is the ADAT outputs, you cannot assign them that easily. Tne mix routing/software is very restricted on this unit. No improvements whatsoever for more than a year. A big shame is that you cannot rename the channels in the mixsoftware! what a bummer in 2021 !
Steinberg/Yamaha does a bad support for their hardware

I dont understand this? You can eiter assign ADAT output to Mix1-4, Daw direct 1-8 or inputs 1-8, very easy with the drop down menus?

It would have to be DAW DIRECT 1- 16 when using an extra ADAT.
I use my UR816C only for outboard gear connecting and the mix outputs are a “pita”.
In many other modern interfaces you can connect any input to any output in their softwaremixers. The URC won’t let you do this.

It’s good that the reverb can be turned off. Duplication as a “convenience” is questionable. I would say that this is a serious jamb from a constructor or an implementer. And apparently the jamb is not removable. As I understand it, it can be seen in all pieces of iron of the UR series

Strummer. Additional question. Is processing (Reverb) turned off altogether, or is it going to a different mix?

You turn it off for each mix independelntly.

I don’t follow? I mean I understand you´d prefer a super flexible RME type mixer (who wouldn´t), but if there are " many other modern interfaces" with the feature set you require (and at a comparable price point) why did you not get one of these instead?

I also tried the Latest Focusrite 1820 but that one also has a non-flexible software mixer… Budgetwise I could not buy an expensive one.
But I can manage my 816 with all my needs, but with a couple of tricks. And that should have been much more easier. Why not the use of 16 DAW DIRECT’s???
And indeed only 14 connections instead of 16, bummer…
And the support of hardware from Steinberg is bad. They do not care about the users.

So in reality, it’s not really fair to blame Steinberg, as the ones with more flexible routing are also much more expensive, would you not agree?
Regarding the outputs there are 16, because naturally you count all the outputs. The focusrite you mention as two more, for a total of 18.
I run an UR824 as a slave for extra in out: 8 in/8 out beside my 8 ch ADAT mic preamp and my main soundcard, and if i wanted to max the in/out count I would go with three UR824.
BTW if you want a flexible mixer and have ADAT on all your current equipment you can get a small interface called Digiface from another well known german brand and go totally bananas with the patching:)

Would it be so difficult to make 16 DAW directs outs? Can’t imagine that. You can’t assign 16 outputs because the DAW/mains are always using 2 of them so only 14 are free to use to your own.
I only have a 1 extra ADAT unit so I can’t connect one more.
And it’s really a bummer that you can’t rename the channels. Come on…that cannot be that hard to program! But they don’t care to any suggestes improvements. Check this forum for over a year, nothing happens at Steinberg.

Hi ca-booter
Aren’t you assuming a bit too much here?
In reality, I think what you are really saying is that you bought an interface without properly researching it, and now you come up with (admittedly very good) suggestions for improvement and you feel disappointed that Steinberg does not implement them fast enough?
I have used Steinberg interfaces for quite some time, always in tandem with other brands, and while their dspmixfx is far from perfect it is very stable and predictable, something that is important to me. I have used more expensive sound cards, I have used cheaper sound cards, and I feel i always get what I pay for. If I buy a Steinberg UR och UR-C i get good quality and resonable prices. To me they are among the best in their price bracket.
Are they perfect? No, far from it, but if you are looking at trustworthy products in the price range I would suggest Steinberg will outlive most other offerings. Not always with every new bell and whistle, but reliable and long lasting.
Just my 2c

Sorry …fast enough? As the URC series came out, lotst of peaople complained about not being abled to rename the channels, something about every other interface can do.
I have mine for TWO years now and the l;ast socalled update was more than a year ago. Still no chages in this matter. Come on…can’t be thát hard to programm.

Ok, I guess you are the one in the know here, I will just silently slip away and go make some more music.