Roland Studio Capture

[Suprawill1]

Hi Craig and All who wish to share,

Thanks for sharing your time and review on the OctaCapture audio interface.

I see you went with a TASCAM US-20x20 for better latency. Are you also experiencing notable audio performance over the Octa?

I wanted to stick to Roland because I'm not ready to go to Windows10. (currently on 7 Pro) I am however, thinking of going with the Studio Capture. From what I understand, it has pretty much the same technology as the Octa but with 16 combi in, 12 pre's, 8 out plus S/pdif, 2 headphone outs and LED meters for all 16 channels in and out. I had been throwing the Studio Capture and Clarett 8Pre USB back and forth but the latter isn't available until April and I'm hoping to make a move before then.

I don't think I'm as concerned about latency as I am sound quality and the features that the Studio Capture offers. I currently have the Tascam FW-1082 and at 44.1 sample rate - 64 audio latency, I'm getting 2.7ms and 1.5ms with 32 audio latency. So with that said, I'm looking at the Studio Capture unless you can convince me otherwise. Thanks for your thoughts!

 

Will

[MikeRivers]

Hi Craig and All who wish to share,

 

I wanted to stick to Roland because I'm not ready to go to Windows10. (currently on 7 Pro) I am however, thinking of going with the Studio Capture.

 

Have you found interfaces that require Windows 10? I figured that anything that works with Windows 10, at least anything you can buy now, will work fine under Windows 7. Or is it another issue - that you're finding some new PCs that have a Thunderbolt port, and because they're contemporary, run Windows 10? Lots of great interfaces that connect through Thunderbolt that are off limits to us PC users.

 

I had been throwing the Studio Capture and Clarett 8Pre USB back and forth but the latter isn't available until April and I'm hoping to make a move before then.

 

I've become quite a fan of Focusrite's interfaces over the years. Ever since they came out with the Clarett series, which offers preamps a step up from the Scarlett range, I've been pestering them to make a USB version, and now they have. If I was looking for a new interface today, that's the one I'd give serious thought to. But the Scarletts are no slouch, either, and they're in the 2nd generation now, with a step up in the converters, lower jitter, and maybe slightly better preamp.

 

I don't think I'm as concerned about latency as I am sound quality and the features that the Studio Capture offers. I currently have the Tascam FW-1082 and at 44.1 sample rate - 64 audio latency, I'm getting 2.7ms and 1.5ms with 32 audio latency. So with that said, I'm looking at the Studio Capture unless you can convince me otherwise.

 

I don't understand all of those latency numbers. What I look at is the actual time between mic in and headphone out. Using the Scarlett's built-in DSP mixer, I measured only a couple of tenths of a millisecond, which is so close to "zero latency" that I had to repeat the measurement a couple of different ways before I believed it. This bypasses the computer completelly, so it's independent of the driver, USB interface, and computer processing time. All of those, however, can't be avoided if you're playing virtual instruments live.

 

Interfaces are so good these days that you're pretty safe shopping by features, but be sure that you're looking at features that you'll actually use. One of the things that I look for is an easy-to-use direct input monitor feature, and to be honest, I liked how the control panel software for the old Scarletts looked better than what they have for the new interafces, but when using it at a friend's house, I eventually caught on and it's OK. The reason why this is important to me is that with monitoring latency in the 1-3 ms range, if you don't have the headphone volume very loud, you can hear comb filtering on your voice when speaking or singing while listening on headphones. People who say "I've never heard that" are either monitoring too loud or singing too loud.

 

But, just to show what an easygoing kind of guy I am when it comes to interfaces, I've been using a Mackie Satellite as the "sound card" for my day-to-day (not pro recording) computer, and recently replace the computer with one that doesn't have a way to add a Firewire interface. I was looking for a USB interface that was just good enough to listen to the radio (over the Internet) and do quickie audio experiments and evaluations. I ended up with a $60 Behringer Behringer UMC-202.

 

It fits the space, it has the controls I need, and it turns out to have remarkably low distortion and jitter. Although I don't have much use for the mic or instrument inputs in my application, they're very clean and quiet, and it provides 48 volts phantom power and has enough gain to be useful with common microphohnes. The compromise is that its analog output level is unusually low, clipping at about _1.5 dBu (Focusrites go to +16 or higher). I suspect that they reason why they restricted the output voltage is that it's USB-powered with no provision for an outboard power supply. I believe it's "class compliant" so it'll work with a smart phone, and those don't supply as much current from the USB port as real computers do. It works fine with the monitors I'm using in the "office" but the low level output restricts its use as a signal generator for test purposes. Otherwise I'd get another one for my workshop.

 

 

[Suprawill1]

 

Have you found interfaces that require Windows 10? I figured that anything that works with Windows 10, at least anything you can buy now, will work fine under Windows 7. Or is it another issue - that you're finding some new PCs that have a Thunderbolt port, and because they're contemporary, run Windows 10? Lots of great interfaces that connect through Thunderbolt that are off limits to us PC users.

 

Yes, Most of the thunderbolt series require W10 and won't be compliant with W7 PC. That's why Focusrite made a USB version of the Clarett series. A lot of the USB 3 series gun for W10 also.

I build my own 'puters and am thunderbolt ready and also USB 3 & 3.1. I just don't want W10. I have it but won't install it.

 

I've become quite a fan of Focusrite's interfaces over the years. Ever since they came out with the Clarett series, which offers preamps a step up from the Scarlett range, I've been pestering them to make a USB version, and now they have. If I was looking for a new interface today, that's the one I'd give serious thought to. But the Scarletts are no slouch, either, and they're in the 2nd generation now, with a step up in the converters, lower jitter, and maybe slightly better preamp.

 

Focusrite has been part of my research but if I go with them, I would want the Clarett 8Pre USB. Unfortunately, they won't be available until sometime in April. If I have to revert back to the Scarlett series, I would opt for the Roland Studio Capture instead which not only rivals the Scarlett in performance but has way more features that are attractive to me. Craig did a great review on the Roland OctaCapture which preceded the Studio.

 

 

I don't understand all of those latency numbers. What I look at is the actual time between mic in and headphone out. Using the Scarlett's built-in DSP mixer, I measured only a couple of tenths of a millisecond, which is so close to "zero latency" that I had to repeat the measurement a couple of different ways before I believed it. This bypasses the computer completelly, so it's independent of the driver, USB interface, and computer processing time. All of those, however, can't be avoided if you're playing virtual instruments live.

 

Interfaces are so good these days that you're pretty safe shopping by features, but be sure that you're looking at features that you'll actually use. One of the things that I look for is an easy-to-use direct input monitor feature, and to be honest, I liked how the control panel software for the old Scarletts looked better than what they have for the new interafces, but when using it at a friend's house, I eventually caught on and it's OK. The reason why this is important to me is that with monitoring latency in the 1-3 ms range, if you don't have the headphone volume very loud, you can hear comb filtering on your voice when speaking or singing while listening on headphones. People who say "I've never heard that" are either monitoring too loud or singing too loud.

 

Yes, with my present interface, I can get the latency low enough where it's negligible when I run direct and through the computer side by side.

It doesn't have DSP so I have to use the DAW's reverb for singers who need to hear that when recording which of course, means taking the circuitous route. The Studio Capture has DSP, 16 analog in's with 12 great pre's, 8 out, separate channel phantom pwr, compression and auto level adjust and 16 LED level meters for in and out. The driver is rock solid. I have an in home studio and need the inputs and of course, the quality pre's and A/D converters.

Thanks for the reply Mike.

 

 

[Mats Nermark]

I like the fact that the Studio Capture can work as a stand-alone mixer even with the PC shut off.

 

Cheers,

 

Mats N

[MikeRivers]

 

That's actually pretty common these days. The most important differentiating element is whether there are enough front-panel controls that you can make adjustments without needing a computer attached. Otherwise, you get more of a set-and-forget mixer.

 

That's what I call a "funnel." But the Studio Capture does have plenty of knobs on it. At least you can adjust the levels going into the channels, but the faders and pans are probably where they were last used. Although I never had to use it as a live mixer, I made a preset for my Mackie 1200F that had all the pans in the center and all the faders at the same level, probably 6 dB down from full. That way I could use it as a mono mixer with the channel input gain controls and not run out of headroom. But I probalby would have forgotten to load the preset before taking it out into the field - that's something that has to be done from a computer.

 

For what Suprawill1 is looking for, the Roland is probalby a good choice. The only other interfaces that I can think of at the moment that offer in-the-box effects are the ones from Universal and Antelope. You could probably also include the several mixer-in-a-stage-box devices that, while short on knobs, usually have multi-channel USB outputs and plenty of built-in effects, EQ, and dynamic processing that can be put in line to feed any output - and those things have plenty of outputs and inputs. Different way of looking at the problem.

[Mats Nermark]

 

That's actually pretty common these days. The most important differentiating element is whether there are enough front-panel controls that you can make adjustments without needing a computer attached. Otherwise, you get more of a set-and-forget mixer.

 

When I wrote that it worked as a mixer with the PC shut off, I did mean that you could actually use it as a mixer when the PC is shut off. Not having to settle for a set-and-forget scenario.

 

And that is quite rare these days. I've been trying to find one so I can replace my mixer and my audio I/O with one unit and so far the Studio Capture is the only unit I have found that allows this with a modicum of easy, if at all.

 

I would love to be proven wrong, though.

 

Cheers,

 

Mats N

[Mats Nermark]

But it sounds to me that what you really want is something like QSC's TouchMix-30. It's a real mixer and it can stream all 32 inputs individually' date=' as well as record to an outboard hard disk or even a memory stick if you want to record a live gig without a computer. It flies under the radar because most people see it as a mixer, and aren't aware of the audio interface capabilities.[/quote']

 

What I would ideally like is a rack mount unit with all connections on the back (headphones on front) and controls on the front.

Like the Samson SM10 or the Tascam LM-8ST. I wish I could find something like that with audio interface capabilities.

 

Cheers,

 

Mats N

[Suprawill1]

Well, I have purchased the Studio Capture and have integrated it into my system. After looking at the specs of the Octacapture that Craig revealed, the Studio Capture holds suit with its predecessor in performance. The flat frequency response seems to hold true and the stereo imaging proves to create a good separation of instrumentation.

The latency matches my previous interface which says a lot about the Tascam FW-1082, a firewire connectivity unit that precedes the Studio Capture by several years.

I haven't recorded with it yet so I can't comment on the pre's at this juncture but will get back with a review on that. The flexibility of this unit supersedes most interfaces at this price point. So far, I am happy with this purchase.