Gen 4 Focusrite Scarlett

[bayswater]

Any opinions on these new versions?

I’ve been keeping an eye out for something inexpensive that does better D to A than my old MOTU 2408-2 and 828-3. I have the Gen 1 Scarlett 18i8 which sounds a bit better to me (not surprising given the relative ages of these units).

The puzzle is that my ancient Tascam DA-38 still has better clarity and detail than all of these, despite being 18 bit. I’d just keep using that for D/A if it wasn’t so inconvenient, and I could find a driver that works post MacOS-9.

I might just get a M2 and move on, but the description of the Gen 4 Scarletts at SOS sounds promising.

[mikehalloran]

Any opinions on these new versions?

I’ve been keeping an eye out for something inexpensive that does better D to A than my old MOTU 2408-2 and 828-3. I have the Gen 1 Scarlett 18i8 which sounds a bit better to me (not surprising given the relative ages of these units).

The puzzle is that my ancient Tascam DA-38 still has better clarity and detail than all of these, despite being 18 bit. I’d just keep using that for D/A if it wasn’t so inconvenient, and I could find a driver that works post MacOS-9.

I might just get a M2 and move on, but the description of the Gen 4 Scarletts at SOS sounds promising.

The Scarlett Gen 3 went to the same Cirrus Logic chip family that so many others went to in late 2019.

The specs that are not being posted for the Gen 4 tell me more than what is.

As far as I can tell, all that the Gen 4 adds is software control via new Mac/PC apps and drivers. The new functionality is impressive assuming it a) works as advertised, b) doesn't get in the way… but it's all through the apps. The hard numbers for the Gen 3 & 4 are otherwise identical.

I was hoping that Gen 4 would add 32 bit float. That would make a gain riding app to prevent clipping on input unnecessary.

A few companies are beginning to release interfaces with 32 bit float but none have the rest of the features I am looking for so far. I am hoping this changes by January NAMM.

I am trying to get to a planned comparison among the MOTU M2, M•Audio AIR 192|6 and Mackie ProFX6v3. All are using that same CL chip family as the Scarlett Gen3. I want to compare features, gain staging on 'difficult' mics such as the SM7B and power draw hooked up to a Lightning iPad with a pair of current hungry condensers that I have. Medical complications prevented that last weekend but I hope to get this done tomorrow or Wednesday.

[Phil O]

...and power draw hooked up to a Lightning iPad with a pair of current hungry condensers that I have.

That's exactly the reason I went for the M6. The external power supply was the deal breaker for me.

Your friendly neighborhood Phil

[bayswater]

32 bit float would be nice, but I’m happy to do a bit of gain staging to fit things properly into a 24 bit envelop.

My main interest at the moment in the D/A quality. None of the 4 processors I have now do this as well as I’d like. It might be the quality of the analog stage of the outputs. I see a lot of reviews complaining that those who make these things work on the conversion and then scrimp on the analog stages — the part you actually hear. I’m monitoring with Sennheiser 650s do I don’t think those are the problem.

Phil, do you notice an improvement in sound while monitoring with the M6 compared to older units?

[HCMarkus]

32 bit float would be nice, but I’m happy to do a bit of gain staging to fit things properly into a 24 bit envelop.

Yes. Thank You!

To do 32 bit right, you need a pair of preamps and converters.

32 Bit recording is cool for location work. In the studio....meh.

[Phil O]

Phil, do you notice an improvement in sound while monitoring with the M6 compared to older units?

My old unit is an Apogee Rosetta 800. It was their flagship at one time. I'm not hearing any discernible difference. I also have a Lynx Aurora. They all are pretty much the same. I'm monitoring with Adam A7s and a Sub10. I would have to A/B them I suppose.
I went for the M series because I wanted the ESS Sabre32 Ultra DAC. I was originally looking at the 8A which also has the Sabre32 but it is one of the units that hasn't been available -like forever. The M6 was a compromise. It gives me the DAC which I needed for my mixing area, but not the I/O I was looking for. But now I have a very portable unit for stereo location work (with some inputs to spare), and I've found some I/O workarounds via ADAT with my trusty old 828.
Yeah, it sounds great.

Your friendly neighborhood Phil

[bayswater]

Phil, do you notice an improvement in sound while monitoring with the M6 compared to older units?

My old unit is an Apogee Rosetta 800. It was their flagship at one time. I'm not hearing any discernible difference.

Thanks for that.

[James Steele]

Oh gosh... not the topic for this, but I just remembered seeing that Apogee updated the free Soft Limit plug for Apple Silicon. I need to go get it. (Of course, I have yet to use it, but that doesn't stop an unapologetic plugin hoarder like myself! I need an intervention.)

[Phil O]

Soft limit is one of the buttons on my Apogee Rosetta. I never used it because I never run my inputs hot enough to reach the limiter's threshold. I just prefer pristine tracks while recording and do all processing in post. Back in the day, with analog tape, it was a whole different ballgame.

BTW, the reason I retired my Apogee unit is that it uses Apple's native firewire, which no longer comes with Mac OS. I tried some of the available hacks to install the old Apple drivers, but none worked with the Apogee unit. So the M6 is now my DAC for the Mac Mini.

Your friendly neighborhood Phil

[Phil O]

Back on topic.

I have no idea what the Gen 4 Scarlett sounds like, but I do know how an earlier scarlett sounds next to my 8Pre-es.

It was a live situation where we were doing a video of a youth group performance of Hamilton. The theatre was using headset mics on the performers and we had a bunch-a tracks to record. The guy I was helping only had a Scarlet (I don't know what model, I think it was 8 channels IIRC). We combined it with my 8Pre-es. In post it was clear that the MOTU unit had a lower noise floor than the Scarlett even though the levels were pretty well matched.

Just sayin. Maybe the Gen 4 stuff is better.

Also, Bays, I forgot to mention that the M6 outputs clearly sound better than my original 828 - better stereo image.

Your friendly neighborhood Phil

[bayswater]

Also, Bays, I forgot to mention that the M6 outputs clearly sound better than my original 828 - better stereo image.

Your friendly neighborhood Phil

That’s a help. Thanks.

[mikehalloran]

32 bit float would be nice, but I’m happy to do a bit of gain staging to fit things properly into a 24 bit envelop.

Yes. Thank You!

To do 32 bit right, you need a pair of preamps and converters.

32 Bit recording is cool for location work. In the studio....meh.

Not following that. 32 bit interfaces do have mic pres and are built around 32 bit DACs. Here’s a review of three:

https://prorec.com/best-32-bit-audio-interface/

I could live with the Steinberg, I suppose but I want something with 8 in and the I/O blend knob and no one has that, yet.

For the field, I’ve been recording 32 bit float with a Zoom F3 and F8N for awhile now and want that on my desk.

I never liked tracking with comprehension back in the analog days when it was necessary and hate it with digital. A couple singers I record require my old Symetrix unit in the recording chain or I can’t be assured of a clean take. At church into the F8N, it’s not an issue.

All of the "no one needs 32 bit, just do proper gain staging in 24 bit" arguments are lost on me. I’m spoiled. It won’t be the game changer that going to 32 bit float processing in DP was but it will save time—pretty much the reason behind any decision I make these days.

[HCMarkus]

All of the "no one needs 32 bit, just do proper gain staging in 24 bit" arguments are lost on me. I’m spoiled. It won’t be the game changer that going to 32 bit float processing in DP was but it will save time—pretty much the reason behind any decision I make these days.

The dynamic range 24 bits provide exceeds the S/N Ratio of bare wire @1k and higher frequencies in the analog world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson–Nyquist_noise

24 bits describe far greater dynamic range than any analog preamp can offer without introducing noise/distortion that renders the recorded signal unusable. Hence my comment re: dual mic pres, like the Zoom field recorders use. (Two mic pres could drive a single 24 bit converter to pretty much the same result, just as they drive a pair of converters to render 32 bit recordings.) But go for 32! Just make sure to leave any beloved vintage mic pre behind if you want to use it without making gain settings.

I'm not against 32 bit recording. Great in the unpredictable world of field recording. I just see it as superfluous in a studio setting.

EDIT: For clarity, I'm going to revise the above parenthetical comment to say "Two mic pres could drive a pair of converters to render a 24 bit recording that was just as clean and distortion-free as a 32 bit recording."

[bayswater]

The dynamic range 24 bits provide exceeds the S/N Ratio of bare wire @1k and higher frequencies in the analog world.

Reminds me of a conversation I had many years ago with a room full of engineers working on hardware to digitize signals for transport on fiber. They had a lab full of stuff and I asked if they had anything that ran at 32 bit. They said it was a waste of time because somewhere around 28 bits you start to get noise in the system from background cosmic radiation.

[mikehalloran]

The dynamic range 24 bits provide exceeds the S/N Ratio of bare wire @1k and higher frequencies in the analog world.

So what?

There's a practical reason for 32 bit float recorders and interfaces in my work. I have recorders and now want a desktop interface. They save time and were invented for people like me. I have no problem with this.