A note to those using external preamps. I've tried one, solid build quality, and is easy to use. I was thinking of maybe buying one in the + series, but (if I'm not misinformed), there is no way of bypassing the preamps in the SSL . Since I use high-end external preamps I choose to stick with my Audient id44, which allows me to record at 96 and go directly to the converters (bypassing the interface's preamps).
I have the original SSL 2 interface. Great quality and performance. It is Core Audio compliant, meaning that on a Mac no driver software is needed so no worries about upgrading the system software and breaking it.
@@jaccochrysler Such a shame, I have an old tascam that can still be used with some hassle. Doubt it would work with windows 11. Class compliance all the way for anything I'll be buying from now on.
THANK YOU! I would have made a horrible mistake by assuming that a 32-bit recording is equivalent to a 32-bit float recording. I'm a vocalist and I would have been very disappointed with the SSL 2+ MKii when I eventually realized that I couldn't correct clipped recordings by normalizing the waveform. Based on your information, I plan on purchasing the Zoom UAC-232, which has 32-bit float, and a Shure SM7DB. Thank you for helping me make an informed decision.
The plus model is really legit! The fact it has loopback built in and several headphone ports make it super useful. If for some reason I lost my current one, id probably pick this up
wait, but you turned up the analog gain knob when testing the 32bit. so you probably just physically drove the preamps into distortion. there is no recovering from that even with float
I have the original SSL 2+ It has been rock solid stable on my PC and I like it very much. The only gripe I have is that yes, the headphone out could be more powerful to accommodate high impedance cans.
@@porthnole I was comparing the new 2 series to the 12 and seems like the 12 already has all of the “new” things. I think you’re right that it’s the better bargain in the long run.
@@AudioArcturiabut they can’t power low impedance stuff, like a lot of the planar magnetic style headphones that are sub 32ohms. 32 and under, the original SSL 2/2+ introduce A LOT of harmonic distortion. The ideal ratio should be 8:1 which means the original SSL 2 interfaces work best with headphones around 80ohms.
@@MARKMAURIKSsure you can just get an affordable headphone amp out where u go trs out from the ssl to the amp and from there you can power them. U can probably get that amp for $30-50 just make sure it fits what u need.
The Nyquist rate is twice the highest frequency to prevent sample errors (aliasing). All filters, digital or anolog, present some type of distortion, say noise or phase shifts respectively. Quantization noise is not a cumulative per stage as a sum but as a factor of a product; the more stages, noise compounded and can become significant with increasing stages, especially in systems with poor numerical precision or feedback loops.
Should I get the SSL 2+ Mk2 for my teenage son? Or the iD14 Mk2? He plays guitar (electric and acoustic), saxophone and piano. He has a Katana 100 Mk2 (and he's a gamer ;p)
Mine (2, not plus) should arrive tomorrow. Very curious how much better it will be than the Behringer one I've been using for the last 7 years. I don't expect it to be shockingly better, but I'm hoping there will at least be some difference. I mainly got it to try and fix one specific issue I had when recording guitar, so if it doesn't help with that, I might just send it back.
@pieterjansenvanrensburg7322 I only had it for a few days. No complaints, nice build quality, easy setup, sounded good, but it didn't fix the issue I was having (which was caused by mismatched sample rates, as it turned out), in which case I had told myself beforehand that I would return it. As much I wanted to keep it, I couldn't justify it just for the extra headphone jack and 32 bit. I'll keep using the Behringer until it somehow dies, or until I have money to spare (unlikely). The only thing I found strange was that a lot of signal was coming in, even with the gain all the way down. This was with guitar through my amp pedal into one of the instrument inputs. I almost didn't have to turn it up to get the right level. Not sure if that's good or bad, or because of the high bitrate, it was just surprising to me.
@@pieterjansenvanrensburg7322 Can't say much about the sound quality because I didn't record much at all. It did sound different from my Behringer and I would assume it's objectively better, but not in ways that I was able to perceive. It gave me a bit more peace of mind knowing it's a reputable brand, but that's only worth so much. The 4k switch did change the sound noticeably, I think I would've used it for some things but it didn't sound like anything you couldn't achieve with EQ and/or a specific type of compression. I don't have a very trained ear for that kind of subtleties. If my Behringer were to die, I would at least consider buying it (the SSL) again, because it did have a few features I would want that the Behringer doesn't have (better input meters and 2 headphones jacks).
@@donderjong If I had to imagine it detected it was a hi-z instrument. Hi-z and line level are different. If working correctly a hi-z input shouldn't need any additional gain in a 2 channel interface like this. External pre amps can be a different story but most small, 2 channel devices either have a switchable hi-z mode or it automatically detects it and makes the proper adjumsnts under the hood. Hope that made sense for you.
Those are some nice looking interfaces, I was expecting them to be more expensive considering the brand. The price seems quite reasonable. The 2-channel audio interface market is quite crowded, it seems like to be most competitive segment of the audio interfaces. Personally I would want an interface with mostly line inputs, like a combination of 2 mic inputs + 8 line inputs but almost no manufacturer seems to make these. More inputs typically means more mic pre’s but for a setup with only synths those mic preamps remain unused. I currently have a Steinberg UR-242 and a UR-22 mk2 in use with two different setups (PC and iPad). The Tascam Series 208i looks tempting as an upgrade but I wonder if the adat inputs on that work in class compliant mode on the iPad. It’s seems quite capable for the price.
Check out the Arturia stuff... currently working with an AudioFuse 16Rig and once you wrap your head around the routing matrix, is a solid piece of kit to grow a hybrid setup...tons of line i/o Sounds fantastic & rated quite high in technical reviews. 😃
I love this shape for a tabletop interface. But I don’t want to do any more in between games. If I was looking to buy my first interface I’d probably get the ssl12, but I think I just have to transition to RME at this point
I am a bit confused about the 32 bits part. I was excepting it to work the same way as a field recorder. Lately I have been considering replacing my old interface and I was looking into the whole 32 bits thing thinking it could prevent/recover audio clipping. Now I wonder how to know whether or not any given 32 bits interface can handle clipping the same way a field recorder would. Does anyone know how the presonus quantum hd performs in that regard ?
I love my original SSL 2+, but when the SSL 12 dropped I was feeling a bit left out. I'm glad I didn't upgrade to that, seeing as these new Mk2s are awesome. I'll hold out a bit longer to see if they drop a 12 Mk2 before I upgrade, but my 2+ is starting to struggle with the USB-C port. The thing I really loved and bought into was that 4K button. I'd like to see some more reliable tests done to either confirm or call cap on my anecdotal experience, but I quickly noticed with the button engaged there seemed to be a very narrow range in which my DAW meters would set off clip indicators on the input during recording; however, upon playback (after clearing the clip indicators) that same part of the recording was not clipping (it would be at -0.1 or right at 0 but not above). I always assumed it was the 4K button doing some form of "soft clipping" (I hesitate using that term after the latest videos from AP Mastering lol) or limiting through the analogue circuitry mumbo jumbo >insert marketing flavor text here< I was pleasantly surprised when I discovered that, and liked the way the slight distortion sounded most of the time, so I pretty much always keep that button on; but I'm not sure how much that anecdotal experience would hold up under intense scientific scrutiny; however, the lack of HPF on the original unit always bugged me since they're not compatible with the SSL 360 software control for the SSL12. I'm quite happy to see HPF added to the Mk2s, but are they compatible with that SSL software?
Back when testing recording 96k vs 44/48 years ago and the thing that made me move to 96K, is the difference when recording a stereo track. When recording Stereo ( such as stereo overheads, or room mics or capturing the stereo mix) the Stereo sound stage sounds more 3D when recorded at 96K verses 44/48. Down the road there are many pluses as you mentioned, specifically how plugs sound/work at 96K vs 44/48.
Amazing. As ever more and more hobbyists, DJs and semi-pros invade the recording world, the companies are selling us new gear based on "things you can't actually hear". I'm producing and mixing international, major release albums on 24:48 into delivery format.
The overwhelming majority of music listeners won't even be able to discern a difference between 44 and 192. If it sounds good, it sounds good. But, but, but, aliasing.
Add to that the fact that most people listen on crappy equipment anyway (my daughter mainly listens on her phone speaker ☹️), and things like high bit/sample rate become even more irrelevant. That said, some small minority of us still strive to hear music on the highest quality equipment we can (I will _never_ let go of my pair of 35-year-old Infinitys).
Just about a month before they released the MK2 I upgraded from my old Yamaha mixer (that still works great) to an Audient id24. I was pretty bummed because the SSL was my second choice, but that went away pretty quickly once I realized they skipped AGAIN software support in this interface. Having three digital outputs and mixes in my Audient is super handy since you can route the loopback any way you want. For the price of an SSL 2+ I expect it to have more flexibility than my old Yamaha mixer, but they seem to only care about those stuff in the SSL12 interfaces.
@@SUPERNOVA.PRODUCER it doesn't, the measurements are up in Julian Krause's channel. Either way, I don't know why someone would care, for better or worse. Sounds like a skill issue.
One test you could do is midi latency. When using a soft synth for example or a heavy sample library. Might be less of an issue on Mac but on windows you will see huge differences between brands regarding latency. This is also where RME is pretty much king since they actually design chips and drivers themselves and not buying parts like 90% of the other brands.
I bought SSL12 some 6 months ago but ended up returning it because RTL was too much for me. I went for Motu M4 instead because I read some good stuff about it and the latencies were way better than SSL12. Motu being one of the few companies who actually do their own drivers instead of Thesycon's USB audio, which most audio interface manufacturers use. Using both, M4 and SSL12 within a week or so, I really can't say if either had better DAC or pres. Both sounded a step up from my old Motu Ultralite Mk3
The first SSL 2 certainly can already record at 192 kHz. It's really useful for those of us using sound interfaces also for sound measurement purposes (or signal analysis). The lower typical bitrates would just provide one fourth of the data for the same measurement. Sound interfaces aren't just tools for music production 😄, although this is the main topic of the channel and it obviously needs to be mentioned. High specs are great to have, but it's true you don't always need to use the full potential (it's the same concept as analog headroom).
I just bought the SSL2+. In hindsight, I bought more functionality than I'm ever going to use, and would have been more than good with just the SSL2. Oh well - I suppose it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. I will say that it sounds great so far. For my use, I'm doing voiceover, single mic, going into Adobe Audition. My goal was to get a really clean, neutral preamp, and polished, professional sound, and I believe I have achieved that.
As for the output, here the difference is notable, the depths and separation of instruments are better translated in the mkII version, it feels tighter, the sound perception is greater, a better interpretation of the stereo and the frequency range is more balanced.
I'm really hoping you can help! How would this work with the Sennheiser HD 600 Open-back headphones? Would it work well, or would I be better off looking at something like the Apollo Twin?
Good and compact introduction! I struggle to decide between the SSL12 and the Audient id44 mkII. I know the id44 is superior in terms of specs but idk if i can justify the higher price (and i would need to pay for an midi interface too). What are your (and community's) thoughts about the id44? Am I crazy or does the id44 sound much better? I listened to some audio examples in which the id44 sounds in most cases more musical. I haven't heard or tried neither in person to be fair. More context: - need an upgrade to my ur22 mkI - I have an analog synth, percussion and 2 guitars (acoustic and electric) - plan to upgrade my setup to new e drums, one synth and maybe a groovebox - my headphones are the dt770 pro 250ohm - will record vocals too in the future - no outboard gear so far - I use Windows 10, Reaper and Ableton - the UR22 driver su*s a lot, lmao
I just upgraded from the original SSL 2+ to the MK2 and the difference is astounding! I have never heard such transparency from my Soundelux ELUX 251 mic! If you're trying to achieve miracles with this type of converter and you're using some cheapass mic...then there just isn't any point in arguing 24bit vs 32bit...as you'll just never hear it. GARBAGE IN....GARBAGE OUT! But when you've got a (insert brand here) high quality microphone, you might just wet yourself....finally.😂
Stay Strong my friend. We all make mistakes. Your heart was in the right place. Those who left your channel without allowing you an explanation and a chance to redeem yourself were not true fans and mature. Your channel will grow where you ned it to be. God Bless you. Love your channel! Be yourself always! -David
This is a nice interface but it has one big drawback: The buttons. After 3 years of use, the buttons start to make noise, like in analog consoles. But with the diference that analog consoles are designed to be serviced. I have one of these and it's becoming unusable. Does someone have a solution for this?
From my perspective it truly is the weakest point of the interface. My SSL 2 had issues with the buttons since the very first months of use (bought in September 2020). I didn't detect it until much later, since at the time I wasn't using the buttons at all, just randomly touching their surface. There's an SSL 2 teardown guide in iFixit, titled «Solid State Logic SSL 2 Teardown», and written by Sergei Pachtchenko. You could replace the buttons yourself, or either provide the guide to someone able to service it. It's something I might end up doing if I can find more reliable ones. ¡Suerte con ello!
I think a point you might have missed in the video (unless i zoned out for a sec), is that with higher bitrates, you have higher resolution for editing which is important especially in the Time and Pitch domain. Anything related to audio stretching, pitching (yes that includes Tuning algorithms) will benefit from the higher resolution. Running your studio lower than 96khz in 2024 causes more problems than you might think.
The only thing more bitdepth does is give you a lower noise floor, nothing else. It will not make the slightest bit of difference to time-stretch algorithms. Samplerate only matters if you lower the speed of audio without using time-stretching, it is a myth that a higher samplerate makes time-stretching sound better. This is not difficult to test. I do video game sound design for a living, I always run at 48khz/24bit, it is the optimal solution if you want to get the best quality with the smallest processing power required.
@@ejmikk There is a direct correlation with Samplerate (not bit depth) and pitch/stretching in DSP and it is easy to see (in the data) and hear the difference in artefacting when doing more extreme pitching/stretching. Example: If you stretch or pitch audio, many algorithms compensate for keeping a solid relation between pitch or time (depending on the operation), most often this is done by resampling with a common relation ratio (either by destructive editing, or a filter). A simple test to demonstrate this is to slow down or speed up audio with locked ratio significantly and A/Bing the audio. This lowers the resolution of the audio significantly and can be compensated by having more information to 'compact' in the first place eg, increasing the resolution. There are ways to compensate somewhat, a common one being the use of real-time oversampling before resampling to the required length, but with any data, the more information you have, the less you need to resample, reducing artefacts significantly. On another note, if you want to record with optimal performance, setting your interface to 96khz actually helps with that a lot. This due to many interfaces and plugins running 96khz internally (using resampling for other modes). Not needing over/downsampling algirthms (which are very CPU intensive), will reduce CPU load. Audio engineer and DSP developer for over a decade here (nearing 2 decades), Already moved to 96khz standard for recording back in 2012 on an old 2008 Mac pro, performance is not the issue anymore. I also can't remember the last time I have worked on an audio plugin that was lower than 96khz internally...
Nice video with nice explanation. BUT...is it true this audio interface does work fine or like plug and play on Mac without needing a driver ? Please let me know!
Don't have it but I'm sure it does not need drivers. They don't provide drivers apart from ASIO/WDM on their website. It's such a basic and low level thing in operating systems nowadays that you can plug most of these into your phone or tablet. But they have firmware updates too there.
yes its important for people to understand 32 int vs 32 bit floating point. Its a little crazy to think now digital is 32 bit standard, it has been 24 bit for the past 20 or so years. I'd guess this is cool because the move to floating point transformation I would think isn't much of a leap after that. That is good news for lazy production.
i wonder... i use ssl plugins by having the slate digital bundle( they made a arrangement with ssl) , and can it be possible to take advantage from it using one of this interfaces?
So question I'm pondering. The original 2+ vs new 2? They are basically the same price. I like the extra conections more than i think i need 32 bit... and the extra 60-80 € .. not sure are worth it.. ?
I carried out tests, and the conclusion is simple: the first ssl has more bass and lower mids with a feeling of more body and the 4k sends everything a little more to the front (enhancement in high mids) the ssl mkII there is more definition in transients due to the 32 bits You can feel and hear the dynamic range to define it. It's like having a higher room compared to a room with a lower ceiling, and the transients are more defined (modern sound) but I feel less definition in the low frequencies and less body. As for the output, here the difference is notable, the depths and separation of instruments are better translated in the mkII version, it feels tighter, the sound perception is greater, a better interpretation of the stereo and the frequency range is more balanced.
@SUPERNOVA.PRODUCER om not sure i have either the ears, brain or words to be able to capture notice nor express what you just said. should i be standing in front of the two trying to make out a difference 😅
Uhh, I learned something new. I was not aware of that difference between 32bit float and integer. I just read, that 32bit float has a dynamic range of 1500dB . That is crazy. So are there really interfacing supporting 32bit, float? And ... what it your suggestion for the DAW setting, these are mostly able to work in 32bit/float. Use it?
@@mycosyscompanies are now interfacing 32bit float. Even before the drop of 32bit float "studio" interfaces, most high end 32bit float external recorders where already allowing them to be used as 32bit float audio interfaces with your computer
I have ssl2+ (the first one) and the hi-z guitar input is not good at all compared to using a j48. It's not useable with highgain distortion plugins. everything else about it was pretty good but that was very disappointing. It was only after I bought it that I saw a comparison of a UAD interface and SSL2 interface on DI guitar noise levels. The UAD one was way better for it. But I guess it's still cheaper to get a j48 and an SSL2 than it is to get UAD. Other than that, pushing the mic gain knob too much seems to introduce noise. But otherwise it's miles better than the crap I had before.
Why do you think it's not useable with high gain distortion plugins? The only time I experienced issues (using a high gain amp simulator) it turned out the plugin wasn't configured well. Without being more specific, I could only guess you might not be using the Monitor Mix knob fully turned clockwise to the USB position. Something that bums me when I fail to realise it, there should be an additional button to go fully USB, or either allow to fully disconnect by software the input from the monitor.
@@MrAw3sum I’d rather have a good DI for instruments and a mic pre-amp than any onboard interface stuff. I just want clean good converters and I’m good. The SSL is nice for hooking stuff up with a laptop on the go. I find that any good quality DI is always better than plug straight into an interface. At least it’s what I experience with all interfaces.
Noise will always go up with preamp gain, but the SNR will either get better or past a certain point remain the same. The J48 costs more than the interface itself so what did you expect? Even the Hi-Zs on the RME interfaces don't sound as good as a decent dedicated DI.
I have mark one.. audio spec is fine for the money. What I hate is the buttons.. all of them.. worst buttons on any device ever.. 4k one pops off or doesn't turn on when you press buttons and the phantom power and line in buttons are amazingly even worse.. the rest is built solid so I have no idea who thought those buttons were good.. but it is immediately noticeable:(
Getting right down to most important requirement, the sound I found every interface I have purchased since RME stopped supporting my old RME8 is ‘disappointing’ however the current Baby face is not USB C so for Ipad users future proofing in mind what would you recommend for the best SOUND in 2025. As for being on top of the game It seems todays interfaces look amazing smell really fine have sexy tempting curves but sound boring in bed
These are very performant interfaces but I just don’t see why they have 2 that are so similar. I would have bought one if it had SPDIF but now I’m looking at the new 4th gen Scarlett 16i16
Bit rate only relates to noise floor, ala tape hiss. You will have a lower noise floor at 32 bt vs 24, however, unless you are recording at very low levels, you won't hear it. 0db is always 0db in the digital world. People hear larger dynamic range and they thing it will allow you to be louder. It won't, it will just let you have less noise when no sound or very quiet is happening in your music.
Just no. There is no analog gear with a noise floor below 23bits of dynamic range. There is zero point to 32float recording, so its just as well it doesnt exist. Theyre paired 24bit ADCs, purely to avoid clipping.
@@mycosys There's certainly a point in using 32 bit float, but it might just not be your use case. Not everyone uses sound interfaces just for music production, and 32 bit float isn't just connected to whatever is coming from the ADC. For example, I require to mix and later average several recordings of certain sound measurement activities, and I certainly need to use 32 bit float for the mixing part before averaging, while I just need to make sure the input signal stays below the clipping point of the interface input for each individual take.
@@riangarianga LOL i said 32 bit RECORDING and you go rant about 32bit processing. OFC FP32 processing matters, computers have dedicated FP32 pipelines so its many times faster, and the dynamic range is essential for lossless processing - luckily conversion is just adding a fixed 8 bits to the end of the INT24 number. FP32 recording, conversely, DOES NOT EXIST
@@mycosys Perhaps I wasn't clear. Recording in 32 bit float is necessary if you're going to automate the process of hundreds of files in 32 bit float, like is my case. It would be a silly waste of time and resources to record in 24 bit and convert it to 32 bit float if you know you're going to mix them later in 32 bit float, we aren't even talking about using a DAW. Again: your use case doesn't need to be the same use case of others, so just don't go on something being pointless for everyone because it's pointless *to you*. Even Autotune appeared as a tool to study seismic waves, what does it have to do with audio? It turns out different fields can benefit from a certain technology, but you won't see a correlation unless you're involved in both fields. No analog to digital converter can cover the dynamic range of 32 bit float recording now? Who cares, technology never ever advanced in a coordinated way, we simply don't stop progressing in one area because other areas need to catch up. Many measuring instruments unrelated to audio use WAV 32 bit float as the format to register measured signals.
@@riangarianga LOL no it isnt. As i said INT24 and FP32 differ by a fixed mantissa - it takes literally no less processing power to move them than convert them. Its a zero cost conversion. Every DAW currently records in INT24 and processes that INT24 cast to FP32.
Those are two different classes. EASILY Babyface Pro FS. I had the SSL 2 + the original not MK2 and it sounds like anything in that price range, not bad, not good. Babyface Pro FS is on a whole different (Realll Good) level.
Yeah, I need a new portable interface for travel, as my old one wasn't class compliant and eventually was dropped (on macOS), and the mk+ seems provocative, disappointed like others they dropped the adat I/o, but like the 5 pin din addition, wish they had 4 inputs (Ala mic/guit/external synth/whathaveyou, but so it goes. Thanks for the review.
I can't believe there's no ADAT input, though they'll probably save it for a bigger version. Do u get jitter with a higher sample rate? I though interfaces like my Audient ID14 MKII sound on par with Lynx converters according to a Paul Third video but only when recording at 96 Sample Rate
One thing I'm curious about is how filtering is done in hardware with AD/DA converters (well, at least DA converters, I'm not sure if AD converters have input filters, but I'd guess they probably do) - the filtering needs to happen on the analog side, and unless the circuit can switch between different filters or change the filter parameters for different sample rates, it must mean that the filter is fixed, and a fixed filter would have to be set to the "worst case scenario", ie. lowest sample rate - so even if you set the sample rate to 192khz, the filter would still need to be able to cope with e.g. 44.1khz, so it would still need to be a pretty steep filter at 22.05khz. Of course, filters in the digital domain can be adapted to different sample rates easily enough, so oversampling in plugins (if it's still needed & active at, say, 96khz) could benefit, but the analog filters I'm really not sure about.
Why I think to buy one is the impressive plugin pack what's come whit for that price... Not really for the quality of the interface... And I think i'm not alone whit that!
Just a nitpick, but afaik REAPER has 64bit float processing, internally (not 32bit); and it's also important to note that the bit depth of recorded files is *not* set by the interface - rather, you configure it in Project settings (Option/Alt + Enter) under the Media tab, and it defaults (I think) to 24bit PCM - so even if your interface has those fancy 32bit integer converters, it gets downsampled immediately to 24bit. Or at least I assume that's what would happen, I don't have a 32bit-capable interface on hand to test it, but the settings are there.
Nice explanation on the 192khz recording-side. "Wel even mierenneuken:" delivery specs in multimedia (gaming audio and film/tv stuff) has always been 48khz/24bit ;)
I was wondering at first... "How are they doing 32 bit float in an analog interface??" -- little surprised it doesn't have a basic SSL compressor built in like the SiX.
@@APUSoftware10 or 15 years ago a good interface would cost €1200 or more. It was the same discussion then, but the problem is the younger generation doesnt seem to understand that I had to work a whole summer or even two to even buy a decent synth. I dont like this debate that whatever is released, ”expensive” can suddenly be a few hundered euros… In that case TEMU will soon own the broader spectrum of the music equipment market.
32float is not higher detail. Not even in theory - it is 24bit of detail with an 8 bit gain mantissa. There is also not a single 32bit ADC in existence, they are paired 24bit. And there is no analog gear with more than 24bit of dynamic range. 32float only has any point in internal processing and claiming otherwise is a pure scam. I will be recommending people steer clear of SSL over it tbh. They clearly have sold out.
exactly, I had a course about samplerate and bitrate last week in my studies for becoming sound engineer and they told us the same things about 32bit float. If you gain stage properly 32 bit float is useless
@@aether3395 not "useless" but definitely redundant with rigorous gain staging. Also, chips are cheap given their various functionality. Potentiometers and analog circuits are expensive given their focused functionality. Cynical takes on manufacturers aside, I think a lot of good audio folks who want the community to be skilled and rigorous when gain staging just want people to understand that 32 bit audio (float or otherwise) does not replace basic recording competence. It does however add options in scenarios where even diligent gain staging didn't stop a source from getting too loud for a 24 bit fixed file. Shit happens to the best of recordists, and most are happy for the additional failover.
All DAWs are internally 32 float as CPUs have a dedicated 32float processing pipeline that runs parallel to the integer pipeline, making it MUCH faster to process in FP32.
@@mycosys yes but I was specifically referring to Pro Tools highest Bit Depth it can record at. It does recover peaks correctly and not like they demonstrated in his video.
i got rid of my ssl2+ mk1. the headphone amp is extremely weak (unusable with powerhungry headphones - planar ones) and overall a mediocre experience.. i switched to RME
I'm pretty sure you got a dud... Mine is plenty loud, I have never turned the volume up higher than 6 and I listen pretty loud. I have a couple planars(LCD-X and Fostex t60rp).
@@nihost 🤣🤣🤣 adi pro 2? Really? It also has two analog microphone and preamplified inputs, It only appears in its headphone output, which is where the strength of its AD conversion is. RME is still mid-range experience and play with Lynx Prism Apogee Antelope.
Id rather it be $400 more dollars and they enclued the the SiX EQ and G Comp Compressor...now that would have been Nice...Ive the the UAD Volt 476 I had the SSL 2+ my Volt just sounds better
@@krexilinmixiling I was talking about the pre-amps, maybe they will get a more professional version because Topping is very good with high-end conversion and headphone amps. I think this is their first step into the interface market. I hope they step up the quality because they can really improve on it. The pre-amps are noisy compared to competitors for some people not a problem maybe but you can definitely hear it, so for me it’s a no go 🙅♂️
in compsci/engineering/programming they are referred to as INT32 and FP32. CPUs dont have fixed point processors, they generally have integer logic and FP math pipelines.
I heard "floating points". Anyway, 32-bit (fixed or floating) is now "old school" in computer science. Now, we're talking 128-bit when 64-bit is the common size of information "moved" each cycle. In Audio, the change from 24-bit to 32-bit has a lot of information added, but do we really "use it"?
@@syjwg 32 float is 24INT plus an 8 bit gain mantissa, yes we use it because its FAST. FP32 isnt 'old school' - single precision FP predominates over double precision (FP64) because of speed - using quad precision is rare. Not just because its 10x slower but because very little needs that detail level.
Great nutshell explanation on the filtering! About the 24bit vs 32bit I agree; it's a natural evolution of the technology and while on paper it should be better in all aspects, the lot of the average, and maybe even professional, users won't notice the difference but purely buy it based on 'better numbers'
There is no advantage to 32 float recording as no analog gear has more than 23 bits of dynamic range, and there are no actual 32bit ADCs - these are paired 24bit
Just wait a "bit" until the evolution will show you a 64-bit Analog to Digital converter where 40 extra bits will record the room temperature, the smell, the exact position of the microphone and tell you if you can't sing or play an instrument. 😊
I have TWO SSL2s, the regular an plus. THEY BOTH are HORRENDOUS! Both have extreme issues with the line/hi-z/48v buttons, in with you have to hold your finger or in it or fiddle with it over and over to get it to work. The preamps also do not respond in realtime to gain adjustments. Literally the worst build quality for price I've ever encountered.
I haven't found yet an external audio interface better than my Audient iD 14 MKII, in terms of built and sound quality and in the same price range. Not a sponsored comment 😅
I carried out tests, and the conclusion is simple: the first ssl has more bass and lower mids with a feeling of more body and the 4k sends everything a little more to the front (enhancement in high mids) the ssl mkII there is more definition in transients due to the 32 bits You can feel and hear the dynamic range to define it. It's like having a higher room compared to a room with a lower ceiling, and the transients are more defined but I feel less definition in the low frequencies and less body. As for the output, here the difference is notable, the depths and separation of instruments are better translated in the mkII version, it feels tighter, the sound perception is greater, a better interpretation of the stereo and the frequency range is more balanced.
This is a subjective comment because you base it on feel. However, if you manage to make measurements and post a comparison video based on objective data, you'll have in your hands a potentially successful one!
Essential information about sample rates:
th-cam.com/video/cIQ9IXSUzuM/w-d-xo.html
people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
WHAT?????? No 32bit floating point? Swindlers.
A note to those using external preamps. I've tried one, solid build quality, and is easy to use. I was thinking of maybe buying one in the + series, but (if I'm not misinformed), there is no way of bypassing the preamps in the SSL . Since I use high-end external preamps I choose to stick with my Audient id44, which allows me to record at 96 and go directly to the converters (bypassing the interface's preamps).
Fake
@@SUPERNOVA.PRODUCER
What is?
Id44 is a serious piece of gear!
SSL12 can bypass preamps if you use line in
@@SUPERNOVA.PRODUCER What is fake my friend?
I have the original SSL 2 interface. Great quality and performance. It is Core Audio compliant, meaning that on a Mac no driver software is needed so no worries about upgrading the system software and breaking it.
This is actually a great advantage. I have a pile of old fine converters that are not supported anymore.
@@jaccochrysler Such a shame, I have an old tascam that can still be used with some hassle. Doubt it would work with windows 11. Class compliance all the way for anything I'll be buying from now on.
@@SibaNL O, man. I am still looking at you Apogee.
is this new MK2 one also Core Audio compliant??
@@_Trakman yes
This video is so nerdy and niche... I love it
THANK YOU! I would have made a horrible mistake by assuming that a 32-bit recording is equivalent to a 32-bit float recording. I'm a vocalist and I would have been very disappointed with the SSL 2+ MKii when I eventually realized that I couldn't correct clipped recordings by normalizing the waveform. Based on your information, I plan on purchasing the Zoom UAC-232, which has 32-bit float, and a Shure SM7DB. Thank you for helping me make an informed decision.
The plus model is really legit! The fact it has loopback built in and several headphone ports make it super useful. If for some reason I lost my current one, id probably pick this up
..your channel is GOLD!! RESPECT!
I loved my SSL2+ (MK1) but since it didn't have digital input (ADAT) I had to go to an Audient ID14. Great video!
wait, but you turned up the analog gain knob when testing the 32bit. so you probably just physically drove the preamps into distortion. there is no recovering from that even with float
I’m starting to think this guy doesn’t know anything about audio gear and just likes opening boxes
Recently purchased the SSl2+ and I'm really enjoying it so far.
I have the original SSL 2+ It has been rock solid stable on my PC and I like it very much. The only gripe I have is that yes, the headphone out could be more powerful to accommodate high impedance cans.
it has been significantly upgraded on the mk2! however at the new price tag it might make more sense to spend just a little more and get the SSL 12
@@porthnole I was comparing the new 2 series to the 12 and seems like the 12 already has all of the “new” things. I think you’re right that it’s the better bargain in the long run.
The base SSL2 can drive 600ohm headphones - speaking from experience. That's more than sufficient for literally all aspects of mixing/editing.
@@AudioArcturiabut they can’t power low impedance stuff, like a lot of the planar magnetic style headphones that are sub 32ohms. 32 and under, the original SSL 2/2+ introduce A LOT of harmonic distortion. The ideal ratio should be 8:1 which means the original SSL 2 interfaces work best with headphones around 80ohms.
would the Mk2 be enough to power bt990 200ohm?
Hey, can you use 2 pairs of speakers on ssl2+? if yes then can the 2nd pair be controlled with 3&4 button on, in HP volume knob?
no they have no volume control I read the manual and they just output sound you have to have a separate controller.
@@UnknownK34 thank you
@@MARKMAURIKSsure you can just get an affordable headphone amp out where u go trs out from the ssl to the amp and from there you can power them. U can probably get that amp for $30-50 just make sure it fits what u need.
The Nyquist rate is twice the highest frequency to prevent sample errors (aliasing).
All filters, digital or anolog, present some type of distortion, say noise or phase shifts respectively.
Quantization noise is not a cumulative per stage as a sum but as a factor of a product; the more stages, noise compounded and can become significant with increasing stages, especially in systems with poor numerical precision or feedback loops.
Should I get the SSL 2+ Mk2 for my teenage son? Or the iD14 Mk2? He plays guitar (electric and acoustic), saxophone and piano. He has a Katana 100 Mk2 (and he's a gamer ;p)
I'd go with the Audient. It's more flexible with routing and such and has a few more "bells and whistles" if I remember correctly.
2+ all day 🔥🔥
Mine (2, not plus) should arrive tomorrow. Very curious how much better it will be than the Behringer one I've been using for the last 7 years. I don't expect it to be shockingly better, but I'm hoping there will at least be some difference. I mainly got it to try and fix one specific issue I had when recording guitar, so if it doesn't help with that, I might just send it back.
And how is it?
@pieterjansenvanrensburg7322 I only had it for a few days. No complaints, nice build quality, easy setup, sounded good, but it didn't fix the issue I was having (which was caused by mismatched sample rates, as it turned out), in which case I had told myself beforehand that I would return it. As much I wanted to keep it, I couldn't justify it just for the extra headphone jack and 32 bit. I'll keep using the Behringer until it somehow dies, or until I have money to spare (unlikely). The only thing I found strange was that a lot of signal was coming in, even with the gain all the way down. This was with guitar through my amp pedal into one of the instrument inputs. I almost didn't have to turn it up to get the right level. Not sure if that's good or bad, or because of the high bitrate, it was just surprising to me.
@@donderjong interesting findings. I will keep it in mind.. Thanks.. What about the sound quality? Did your recordings sound a bit better/different?
@@pieterjansenvanrensburg7322 Can't say much about the sound quality because I didn't record much at all. It did sound different from my Behringer and I would assume it's objectively better, but not in ways that I was able to perceive. It gave me a bit more peace of mind knowing it's a reputable brand, but that's only worth so much. The 4k switch did change the sound noticeably, I think I would've used it for some things but it didn't sound like anything you couldn't achieve with EQ and/or a specific type of compression. I don't have a very trained ear for that kind of subtleties. If my Behringer were to die, I would at least consider buying it (the SSL) again, because it did have a few features I would want that the Behringer doesn't have (better input meters and 2 headphones jacks).
@@donderjong If I had to imagine it detected it was a hi-z instrument. Hi-z and line level are different. If working correctly a hi-z input shouldn't need any additional gain in a 2 channel interface like this. External pre amps can be a different story but most small, 2 channel devices either have a switchable hi-z mode or it automatically detects it and makes the proper adjumsnts under the hood. Hope that made sense for you.
Those are some nice looking interfaces, I was expecting them to be more expensive considering the brand. The price seems quite reasonable. The 2-channel audio interface market is quite crowded, it seems like to be most competitive segment of the audio interfaces. Personally I would want an interface with mostly line inputs, like a combination of 2 mic inputs + 8 line inputs but almost no manufacturer seems to make these. More inputs typically means more mic pre’s but for a setup with only synths those mic preamps remain unused. I currently have a Steinberg UR-242 and a UR-22 mk2 in use with two different setups (PC and iPad). The Tascam Series 208i looks tempting as an upgrade but I wonder if the adat inputs on that work in class compliant mode on the iPad. It’s seems quite capable for the price.
Check out the Arturia stuff... currently working with an AudioFuse 16Rig and once you wrap your head around the routing matrix, is a solid piece of kit to grow a hybrid setup...tons of line i/o Sounds fantastic & rated quite high in technical reviews. 😃
I love this shape for a tabletop interface. But I don’t want to do any more in between games. If I was looking to buy my first interface I’d probably get the ssl12, but I think I just have to transition to RME at this point
I am a bit confused about the 32 bits part. I was excepting it to work the same way as a field recorder. Lately I have been considering replacing my old interface and I was looking into the whole 32 bits thing thinking it could prevent/recover audio clipping.
Now I wonder how to know whether or not any given 32 bits interface can handle clipping the same way a field recorder would. Does anyone know how the presonus quantum hd performs in that regard ?
I love my original SSL 2+, but when the SSL 12 dropped I was feeling a bit left out. I'm glad I didn't upgrade to that, seeing as these new Mk2s are awesome. I'll hold out a bit longer to see if they drop a 12 Mk2 before I upgrade, but my 2+ is starting to struggle with the USB-C port.
The thing I really loved and bought into was that 4K button. I'd like to see some more reliable tests done to either confirm or call cap on my anecdotal experience, but I quickly noticed with the button engaged there seemed to be a very narrow range in which my DAW meters would set off clip indicators on the input during recording; however, upon playback (after clearing the clip indicators) that same part of the recording was not clipping (it would be at -0.1 or right at 0 but not above). I always assumed it was the 4K button doing some form of "soft clipping" (I hesitate using that term after the latest videos from AP Mastering lol) or limiting through the analogue circuitry mumbo jumbo >insert marketing flavor text here<
I was pleasantly surprised when I discovered that, and liked the way the slight distortion sounded most of the time, so I pretty much always keep that button on; but I'm not sure how much that anecdotal experience would hold up under intense scientific scrutiny; however, the lack of HPF on the original unit always bugged me since they're not compatible with the SSL 360 software control for the SSL12.
I'm quite happy to see HPF added to the Mk2s, but are they compatible with that SSL software?
Back when testing recording 96k vs 44/48 years ago and the thing that made me move to 96K, is the difference when recording a stereo track. When recording Stereo ( such as stereo overheads, or room mics or capturing the stereo mix) the Stereo sound stage sounds more 3D when recorded at 96K verses 44/48. Down the road there are many pluses as you mentioned, specifically how plugs sound/work at 96K vs 44/48.
Amazing. As ever more and more hobbyists, DJs and semi-pros invade the recording world, the companies are selling us new gear based on "things you can't actually hear". I'm producing and mixing international, major release albums on 24:48 into delivery format.
The overwhelming majority of music listeners won't even be able to discern a difference between 44 and 192. If it sounds good, it sounds good. But, but, but, aliasing.
Add to that the fact that most people listen on crappy equipment anyway (my daughter mainly listens on her phone speaker ☹️), and things like high bit/sample rate become even more irrelevant. That said, some small minority of us still strive to hear music on the highest quality equipment we can (I will _never_ let go of my pair of 35-year-old Infinitys).
Just about a month before they released the MK2 I upgraded from my old Yamaha mixer (that still works great) to an Audient id24. I was pretty bummed because the SSL was my second choice, but that went away pretty quickly once I realized they skipped AGAIN software support in this interface. Having three digital outputs and mixes in my Audient is super handy since you can route the loopback any way you want. For the price of an SSL 2+ I expect it to have more flexibility than my old Yamaha mixer, but they seem to only care about those stuff in the SSL12 interfaces.
Ssl have better conversion than audient
@@SUPERNOVA.PRODUCER it doesn't, the measurements are up in Julian Krause's channel. Either way, I don't know why someone would care, for better or worse. Sounds like a skill issue.
One test you could do is midi latency. When using a soft synth for example or a heavy sample library. Might be less of an issue on Mac but on windows you will see huge differences between brands regarding latency. This is also where RME is pretty much king since they actually design chips and drivers themselves and not buying parts like 90% of the other brands.
I bought SSL12 some 6 months ago but ended up returning it because RTL was too much for me. I went for Motu M4 instead because I read some good stuff about it and the latencies were way better than SSL12. Motu being one of the few companies who actually do their own drivers instead of Thesycon's USB audio, which most audio interface manufacturers use.
Using both, M4 and SSL12 within a week or so, I really can't say if either had better DAC or pres. Both sounded a step up from my old Motu Ultralite Mk3
how about the interfaces driver, does it have a robust wme streaming and ASIO response ?
Mine died after about 3 months. Bought the Clarett + 2 and tossed the SSL 2 ... Been a year with my Clarett and It's still beautiful.
Weird, it would have been refundable / replaceable under warranty. Sounds legit
I just got the SSL +2 MKII, what settings should I change in Ableton? sample rate and bit depth? i dont understand this stuff
are these 6.3mm headpohone jacks balanced? So i need a new cable then?
The first SSL 2 certainly can already record at 192 kHz. It's really useful for those of us using sound interfaces also for sound measurement purposes (or signal analysis). The lower typical bitrates would just provide one fourth of the data for the same measurement.
Sound interfaces aren't just tools for music production 😄, although this is the main topic of the channel and it obviously needs to be mentioned. High specs are great to have, but it's true you don't always need to use the full potential (it's the same concept as analog headroom).
I use the old 2+ and for the price it can’t be beat imo. I actually prefer all my connections in the back, it looks cleaner on my desk.
I just bought the SSL2+. In hindsight, I bought more functionality than I'm ever going to use, and would have been more than good with just the SSL2. Oh well - I suppose it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. I will say that it sounds great so far. For my use, I'm doing voiceover, single mic, going into Adobe Audition. My goal was to get a really clean, neutral preamp, and polished, professional sound, and I believe I have achieved that.
MKI has best headphone amp I ever had and 4k is a must have! ❤
As for the output, here the difference is notable, the depths and separation of instruments are better translated in the mkII version, it feels tighter, the sound perception is greater, a better interpretation of the stereo and the frequency range is more balanced.
How come if the crosstalk values are almost similar@@SUPERNOVA.PRODUCER
Thx for sharing. What would you suggest.
I'm really hoping you can help! How would this work with the Sennheiser HD 600 Open-back headphones? Would it work well, or would I be better off looking at something like the Apollo Twin?
Good and compact introduction! I struggle to decide between the SSL12 and the Audient id44 mkII. I know the id44 is superior in terms of specs but idk if i can justify the higher price (and i would need to pay for an midi interface too).
What are your (and community's) thoughts about the id44? Am I crazy or does the id44 sound much better? I listened to some audio examples in which the id44 sounds in most cases more musical. I haven't heard or tried neither in person to be fair.
More context:
- need an upgrade to my ur22 mkI
- I have an analog synth, percussion and 2 guitars (acoustic and electric)
- plan to upgrade my setup to new e drums, one synth and maybe a groovebox
- my headphones are the dt770 pro 250ohm
- will record vocals too in the future
- no outboard gear so far
- I use Windows 10, Reaper and Ableton
- the UR22 driver su*s a lot, lmao
Rme are stupid good. I must have had my ucx a decade or more. It’s still going, still supported, still working. I can’t recommend rme enough.
I just upgraded from the original SSL 2+ to the MK2 and the difference is astounding! I have never heard such transparency from my Soundelux ELUX 251 mic! If you're trying to achieve miracles with this type of converter and you're using some cheapass mic...then there just isn't any point in arguing 24bit vs 32bit...as you'll just never hear it. GARBAGE IN....GARBAGE OUT! But when you've got a (insert brand here) high quality microphone, you might just wet yourself....finally.😂
Stay Strong my friend. We all make mistakes. Your heart was in the right place. Those who left your channel without allowing you an explanation and a chance to redeem yourself were not true fans and mature. Your channel will grow where you ned it to be. God Bless you. Love your channel! Be yourself always! -David
Q) Do these devices have DC-coupled outputs for CV triggers ? if they do I will buy :)
Yes they do
This is a nice interface but it has one big drawback: The buttons. After 3 years of use, the buttons start to make noise, like in analog consoles. But with the diference that analog consoles are designed to be serviced. I have one of these and it's becoming unusable. Does someone have a solution for this?
From my perspective it truly is the weakest point of the interface. My SSL 2 had issues with the buttons since the very first months of use (bought in September 2020). I didn't detect it until much later, since at the time I wasn't using the buttons at all, just randomly touching their surface.
There's an SSL 2 teardown guide in iFixit, titled «Solid State Logic SSL 2 Teardown», and written by Sergei Pachtchenko. You could replace the buttons yourself, or either provide the guide to someone able to service it. It's something I might end up doing if I can find more reliable ones.
¡Suerte con ello!
I think a point you might have missed in the video (unless i zoned out for a sec), is that with higher bitrates, you have higher resolution for editing which is important especially in the Time and Pitch domain. Anything related to audio stretching, pitching (yes that includes Tuning algorithms) will benefit from the higher resolution.
Running your studio lower than 96khz in 2024 causes more problems than you might think.
He literally made a whole video about aliasing and sample rates etc lol, he knows.
The only thing more bitdepth does is give you a lower noise floor, nothing else. It will not make the slightest bit of difference to time-stretch algorithms. Samplerate only matters if you lower the speed of audio without using time-stretching, it is a myth that a higher samplerate makes time-stretching sound better. This is not difficult to test. I do video game sound design for a living, I always run at 48khz/24bit, it is the optimal solution if you want to get the best quality with the smallest processing power required.
@@ejmikk There is a direct correlation with Samplerate (not bit depth) and pitch/stretching in DSP and it is easy to see (in the data) and hear the difference in artefacting when doing more extreme pitching/stretching.
Example: If you stretch or pitch audio, many algorithms compensate for keeping a solid relation between pitch or time (depending on the operation), most often this is done by resampling with a common relation ratio (either by destructive editing, or a filter).
A simple test to demonstrate this is to slow down or speed up audio with locked ratio significantly and A/Bing the audio. This lowers the resolution of the audio significantly and can be compensated by having more information to 'compact' in the first place eg, increasing the resolution.
There are ways to compensate somewhat, a common one being the use of real-time oversampling before resampling to the required length, but with any data, the more information you have, the less you need to resample, reducing artefacts significantly.
On another note, if you want to record with optimal performance, setting your interface to 96khz actually helps with that a lot. This due to many interfaces and plugins running 96khz internally (using resampling for other modes). Not needing over/downsampling algirthms (which are very CPU intensive), will reduce CPU load.
Audio engineer and DSP developer for over a decade here (nearing 2 decades), Already moved to 96khz standard for recording back in 2012 on an old 2008 Mac pro, performance is not the issue anymore. I also can't remember the last time I have worked on an audio plugin that was lower than 96khz internally...
Nice video with nice explanation. BUT...is it true this audio interface does work fine or like plug and play on Mac without needing a driver ? Please let me know!
Don't have it but I'm sure it does not need drivers. They don't provide drivers apart from ASIO/WDM on their website. It's such a basic and low level thing in operating systems nowadays that you can plug most of these into your phone or tablet. But they have firmware updates too there.
yes its important for people to understand 32 int vs 32 bit floating point. Its a little crazy to think now digital is 32 bit standard, it has been 24 bit for the past 20 or so years. I'd guess this is cool because the move to floating point transformation I would think isn't much of a leap after that. That is good news for lazy production.
i wonder... i use ssl plugins by having the slate digital bundle( they made a arrangement with ssl) , and can it be possible to take advantage from it using one of this interfaces?
Idk but I have the og 2 and it’s great. I like the sound. I sold my Apollo twin x and am very happy with my tone.
So question I'm pondering. The original 2+ vs new 2? They are basically the same price. I like the extra conections more than i think i need 32 bit... and the extra 60-80 € .. not sure are worth it.. ?
My opinion :
If you record super duper low 32 bits is a plus.
If not keep your extra money and buy the old version.
I carried out tests, and the conclusion is simple: the first ssl has more bass and lower mids with a feeling of more body and the 4k sends everything a little more to the front (enhancement in high mids) the ssl mkII there is more definition in transients due to the 32 bits You can feel and hear the dynamic range to define it. It's like having a higher room compared to a room with a lower ceiling, and the transients are more defined (modern sound) but I feel less definition in the low frequencies and less body. As for the output, here the difference is notable, the depths and separation of instruments are better translated in the mkII version, it feels tighter, the sound perception is greater, a better interpretation of the stereo and the frequency range is more balanced.
@SUPERNOVA.PRODUCER om not sure i have either the ears, brain or words to be able to capture notice nor express what you just said. should i be standing in front of the two trying to make out a difference 😅
@@SUPERNOVA.PRODUCERwhat headphones were you wearing?
Uhh, I learned something new. I was not aware of that difference between 32bit float and integer.
I just read, that 32bit float has a dynamic range of 1500dB . That is crazy.
So are there really interfacing supporting 32bit, float?
And ... what it your suggestion for the DAW setting, these are mostly able to work in 32bit/float.
Use it?
No, there are not. They '32bit' ADCs are actually paired 24bit ADCs. The best analog gear only has 23bits of equivalent dynamic range.
@@mycosyscompanies are now interfacing 32bit float. Even before the drop of 32bit float "studio" interfaces, most high end 32bit float external recorders where already allowing them to be used as 32bit float audio interfaces with your computer
@@mycosys Zoom UAC-232
Can I use these with an iPad and Cubasis ? If so how ?
Would love to know this aswell!
I have ssl2+ (the first one) and the hi-z guitar input is not good at all compared to using a j48. It's not useable with highgain distortion plugins. everything else about it was pretty good but that was very disappointing. It was only after I bought it that I saw a comparison of a UAD interface and SSL2 interface on DI guitar noise levels. The UAD one was way better for it. But I guess it's still cheaper to get a j48 and an SSL2 than it is to get UAD.
Other than that, pushing the mic gain knob too much seems to introduce noise. But otherwise it's miles better than the crap I had before.
Why do you think it's not useable with high gain distortion plugins? The only time I experienced issues (using a high gain amp simulator) it turned out the plugin wasn't configured well.
Without being more specific, I could only guess you might not be using the Monitor Mix knob fully turned clockwise to the USB position. Something that bums me when I fail to realise it, there should be an additional button to go fully USB, or either allow to fully disconnect by software the input from the monitor.
A J48 is 269 euros, can’t compare that with a High-Z input on a interface.
@@Chaos-Dynamics fair, but I am comparing it to buying an SSL2+j48 vs uad twin or whatever which is insanely expensive.
@@MrAw3sum I’d rather have a good DI for instruments and a mic pre-amp than any onboard interface stuff. I just want clean good converters and I’m good. The SSL is nice for hooking stuff up with a laptop on the go. I find that any good quality DI is always better than plug straight into an interface. At least it’s what I experience with all interfaces.
Noise will always go up with preamp gain, but the SNR will either get better or past a certain point remain the same.
The J48 costs more than the interface itself so what did you expect? Even the Hi-Zs on the RME interfaces don't sound as good as a decent dedicated DI.
I have mark one.. audio spec is fine for the money. What I hate is the buttons.. all of them.. worst buttons on any device ever.. 4k one pops off or doesn't turn on when you press buttons and the phantom power and line in buttons are amazingly even worse.. the rest is built solid so I have no idea who thought those buttons were good.. but it is immediately noticeable:(
Getting right down to most important requirement, the sound
I found every interface I have purchased since RME stopped supporting my old RME8 is ‘disappointing’
however the current Baby face is not USB C so for Ipad users future proofing in mind what would you recommend for the best SOUND in 2025.
As for being on top of the game It seems todays interfaces look amazing smell really fine have sexy tempting curves but sound boring in bed
Been eyeing this cause ive just been using my quad cortex as an interface (which works great), but id like a usb powered interface..little more mobile
These are very performant interfaces but I just don’t see why they have 2 that are so similar. I would have bought one if it had SPDIF but now I’m looking at the new 4th gen Scarlett 16i16
Bit rate only relates to noise floor, ala tape hiss. You will have a lower noise floor at 32 bt vs 24, however, unless you are recording at very low levels, you won't hear it. 0db is always 0db in the digital world. People hear larger dynamic range and they thing it will allow you to be louder. It won't, it will just let you have less noise when no sound or very quiet is happening in your music.
Just no. There is no analog gear with a noise floor below 23bits of dynamic range. There is zero point to 32float recording, so its just as well it doesnt exist. Theyre paired 24bit ADCs, purely to avoid clipping.
@@mycosys There's certainly a point in using 32 bit float, but it might just not be your use case. Not everyone uses sound interfaces just for music production, and 32 bit float isn't just connected to whatever is coming from the ADC.
For example, I require to mix and later average several recordings of certain sound measurement activities, and I certainly need to use 32 bit float for the mixing part before averaging, while I just need to make sure the input signal stays below the clipping point of the interface input for each individual take.
@@riangarianga LOL i said 32 bit RECORDING and you go rant about 32bit processing.
OFC FP32 processing matters, computers have dedicated FP32 pipelines so its many times faster, and the dynamic range is essential for lossless processing - luckily conversion is just adding a fixed 8 bits to the end of the INT24 number.
FP32 recording, conversely, DOES NOT EXIST
@@mycosys Perhaps I wasn't clear.
Recording in 32 bit float is necessary if you're going to automate the process of hundreds of files in 32 bit float, like is my case.
It would be a silly waste of time and resources to record in 24 bit and convert it to 32 bit float if you know you're going to mix them later in 32 bit float, we aren't even talking about using a DAW.
Again: your use case doesn't need to be the same use case of others, so just don't go on something being pointless for everyone because it's pointless *to you*.
Even Autotune appeared as a tool to study seismic waves, what does it have to do with audio? It turns out different fields can benefit from a certain technology, but you won't see a correlation unless you're involved in both fields.
No analog to digital converter can cover the dynamic range of 32 bit float recording now? Who cares, technology never ever advanced in a coordinated way, we simply don't stop progressing in one area because other areas need to catch up. Many measuring instruments unrelated to audio use WAV 32 bit float as the format to register measured signals.
@@riangarianga LOL no it isnt.
As i said INT24 and FP32 differ by a fixed mantissa - it takes literally no less processing power to move them than convert them. Its a zero cost conversion.
Every DAW currently records in INT24 and processes that INT24 cast to FP32.
It worth upgrading over the first version?
Probably not
No.
should I go with the RME babyface pro fs? or the SSL 2+ MK2?
babyface all day but the ssl 2+ is a good option at a cheaper price
Those are two different classes. EASILY Babyface Pro FS. I had the SSL 2 + the original not MK2 and it sounds like anything in that price range, not bad, not good.
Babyface Pro FS is on a whole different (Realll Good) level.
Thank you for your information, this SSL is not 32 floating
Yeah, I need a new portable interface for travel, as my old one wasn't class compliant and eventually was dropped (on macOS), and the mk+ seems provocative, disappointed like others they dropped the adat I/o, but like the 5 pin din addition, wish they had 4 inputs (Ala mic/guit/external synth/whathaveyou, but so it goes. Thanks for the review.
Your option is 12 if you want the SSL sound, the mkIIs have a "modern" sound vs a more classic sound with more mids and bass in the first version
I can't believe there's no ADAT input, though they'll probably save it for a bigger version.
Do u get jitter with a higher sample rate? I though interfaces like my Audient ID14 MKII sound on par with Lynx converters according to a Paul Third video but only when recording at 96 Sample Rate
Cheap "input" button failed on channel 1. Well, that was my experience. Channel two failed, and I never ever used it. Bummer.
I wonder if they will make a MkII of the SSL 12 also.
One thing I'm curious about is how filtering is done in hardware with AD/DA converters (well, at least DA converters, I'm not sure if AD converters have input filters, but I'd guess they probably do) - the filtering needs to happen on the analog side, and unless the circuit can switch between different filters or change the filter parameters for different sample rates, it must mean that the filter is fixed, and a fixed filter would have to be set to the "worst case scenario", ie. lowest sample rate - so even if you set the sample rate to 192khz, the filter would still need to be able to cope with e.g. 44.1khz, so it would still need to be a pretty steep filter at 22.05khz. Of course, filters in the digital domain can be adapted to different sample rates easily enough, so oversampling in plugins (if it's still needed & active at, say, 96khz) could benefit, but the analog filters I'm really not sure about.
There is a combination of analog and separate (high oversampling, sometimes dsd type) digital filtering in interfaces
Why I think to buy one is the impressive plugin pack what's come whit for that price... Not really for the quality of the interface... And I think i'm not alone whit that!
Just a nitpick, but afaik REAPER has 64bit float processing, internally (not 32bit); and it's also important to note that the bit depth of recorded files is *not* set by the interface - rather, you configure it in Project settings (Option/Alt + Enter) under the Media tab, and it defaults (I think) to 24bit PCM - so even if your interface has those fancy 32bit integer converters, it gets downsampled immediately to 24bit. Or at least I assume that's what would happen, I don't have a 32bit-capable interface on hand to test it, but the settings are there.
Processing, yes, but in this case, I was talking about the file recording settings
As a pro YT reviewer don’t forget to shout as loud as you can ….
I heard it in the edit 😅
@@Whiteseastudio 😉
Nice explanation on the 192khz recording-side. "Wel even mierenneuken:" delivery specs in multimedia (gaming audio and film/tv stuff) has always been 48khz/24bit ;)
but delivery in the music industry has been 44.1khz/16bit due to CDs for a long time (and maybe still is with some streaming platforms, not sure)
@@jahudka Ehm, yeah... that's what he's mentioning... ? I'm just adding additional info.. not debating anything
@@bartgroot3672 yeah sorry I misunderstood your previous comment, my bad ;-)
I was wondering at first... "How are they doing 32 bit float in an analog interface??" -- little surprised it doesn't have a basic SSL compressor built in like the SiX.
A SSL compressor built in a interface that cost € 200 ex VAT?
Or do you mean as a plugin?
@@ast4127 Good point
@@APUSoftware10 or 15 years ago a good interface would cost €1200 or more. It was the same discussion then, but the problem is the younger generation doesnt seem to understand that I had to work a whole summer or even two to even buy a decent synth.
I dont like this debate that whatever is released, ”expensive” can suddenly be a few hundered euros…
In that case TEMU will soon own the broader spectrum of the music equipment market.
Hmmm... the SSL plugins i bought are kinda underwhelming. I even prefer Waves or PA g buss compressors over the SSL native one
I agree, I bought some SSL plugins on sale and ending up never using them, even the bus compressor. I don’t like them 😂
still no MIDI in/out on the SSL2 non +, LOL
Listening to stuff like this just to buy my first home interface is giving me autism
Audient DI preamp is fuck1ng
winner!
Yes...Still no power button. 🤨
32float is not higher detail. Not even in theory - it is 24bit of detail with an 8 bit gain mantissa.
There is also not a single 32bit ADC in existence, they are paired 24bit. And there is no analog gear with more than 24bit of dynamic range.
32float only has any point in internal processing and claiming otherwise is a pure scam. I will be recommending people steer clear of SSL over it tbh. They clearly have sold out.
exactly, I had a course about samplerate and bitrate last week in my studies for becoming sound engineer and they told us the same things about 32bit float. If you gain stage properly 32 bit float is useless
@@aether3395 not "useless" but definitely redundant with rigorous gain staging. Also, chips are cheap given their various functionality. Potentiometers and analog circuits are expensive given their focused functionality. Cynical takes on manufacturers aside, I think a lot of good audio folks who want the community to be skilled and rigorous when gain staging just want people to understand that 32 bit audio (float or otherwise) does not replace basic recording competence. It does however add options in scenarios where even diligent gain staging didn't stop a source from getting too loud for a 24 bit fixed file. Shit happens to the best of recordists, and most are happy for the additional failover.
@@aether3395it's a pretty much pointless for recording music and more useful for recording in erratic situations eg. an interview in a warzone.
No Auto Gain and SSL360 connection?
@@gurumajuindonesia 🤣🤣🤣
Pro Tools is 32 Bit Float
All DAWs are internally 32 float as CPUs have a dedicated 32float processing pipeline that runs parallel to the integer pipeline, making it MUCH faster to process in FP32.
@@mycosys yes but I was specifically referring to Pro Tools highest Bit Depth it can record at. It does recover peaks correctly and not like they demonstrated in his video.
Did they improve upon that suuuuper weak headphone amp?
Betta then ID44 mk2?
SSL has better conversion than audient
i got rid of my ssl2+ mk1. the headphone amp is extremely weak (unusable with powerhungry headphones - planar ones) and overall a mediocre experience.. i switched to RME
I'm pretty sure you got a dud... Mine is plenty loud, I have never turned the volume up higher than 6 and I listen pretty loud. I have a couple planars(LCD-X and Fostex t60rp).
@@guybuddy1 maybe, but for me, RME does an overall better job but also another price range of course
SSL has the same AD DA converters RME babyface
@@SUPERNOVA.PRODUCER I have the ADI 2 Pro FS R Black Edition, as i dont need any mic-preamps on the interface
@@nihost 🤣🤣🤣 adi pro 2? Really? It also has two analog microphone and preamplified inputs, It only appears in its headphone output, which is where the strength of its AD conversion is. RME is still mid-range experience and play with Lynx Prism Apogee Antelope.
LETS GET STARTED
nobody designs black boxes like ssl
The design looks kinda ugly compared to its predecessor... I don't get it.
I thought the same 😆.
Day 3 of asking you to review Kit Plugins bb n105. You will love it trust me.
Id rather it be $400 more dollars and they enclued the the SiX EQ and G Comp Compressor...now that would have been Nice...Ive the the UAD Volt 476
I had the SSL 2+ my Volt just sounds better
Disappointing that they removed the adat jack
They only have adat the ssl12, the 2 and 2+ they never had.
MkII stands for mark 2
I bet they're gonna hit us with a rack mount
Could you talk about toping e2x2
I looked into that, headphone output is very good but the pre-amps lack significant. Wouldn’t recommend it.
@@Chaos-Dynamics i mean at that price you cant said that, and for mixing is great, still better than focusrite
@@krexilinmixiling I was talking about the pre-amps, maybe they will get a more professional version because Topping is very good with high-end conversion and headphone amps. I think this is their first step into the interface market. I hope they step up the quality because they can really improve on it. The pre-amps are noisy compared to competitors for some people not a problem maybe but you can definitely hear it, so for me it’s a no go 🙅♂️
I think you have have meant to say 32 bit fixed-point rather than 32-bit integer?
in compsci/engineering/programming they are referred to as INT32 and FP32. CPUs dont have fixed point processors, they generally have integer logic and FP math pipelines.
I heard "floating points". Anyway, 32-bit (fixed or floating) is now "old school" in computer science. Now, we're talking 128-bit when 64-bit is the common size of information "moved" each cycle. In Audio, the change from 24-bit to 32-bit has a lot of information added, but do we really "use it"?
@@syjwg 32 float is 24INT plus an 8 bit gain mantissa, yes we use it because its FAST. FP32 isnt 'old school' - single precision FP predominates over double precision (FP64) because of speed - using quad precision is rare. Not just because its 10x slower but because very little needs that detail level.
God bless you White Sea Studio 🙏😭🎸
God bless President Trump 🙏🇺🇸
But You got Exited about TEMU
Ben je nederlands?
Ja
I'm still completely satisfied with my PrismSound Lyra interface.
Great nutshell explanation on the filtering! About the 24bit vs 32bit I agree; it's a natural evolution of the technology and while on paper it should be better in all aspects, the lot of the average, and maybe even professional, users won't notice the difference but purely buy it based on 'better numbers'
There is no advantage to 32 float recording as no analog gear has more than 23 bits of dynamic range, and there are no actual 32bit ADCs - these are paired 24bit
Just wait a "bit" until the evolution will show you a 64-bit Analog to Digital converter where 40 extra bits will record the room temperature, the smell, the exact position of the microphone and tell you if you can't sing or play an instrument. 😊
@@syjwg With an automatic mute function 😜😁
I think you might have beaten Julian Krause to it. SSL 2+ MK1 user here and have been waiting for his review so it's nice to see this.
SSL were at no point in their career famous for their preamps. you are basically paying the name here. pricepoint is decent though.
Buy? No one, no digital inputs... Sh*t..
noisy usb bus power
never again will I buy an interface with usb power. pop, click
If you have USB power noise, the problem is in the power supply powering the system that powers the USB device.
I have TWO SSL2s, the regular an plus. THEY BOTH are HORRENDOUS! Both have extreme issues with the line/hi-z/48v buttons, in with you have to hold your finger or in it or fiddle with it over and over to get it to work. The preamps also do not respond in realtime to gain adjustments. Literally the worst build quality for price I've ever encountered.
Lewitt 😂😂😂😂
I haven't found yet an external audio interface better than my Audient iD 14 MKII, in terms of built and sound quality and in the same price range. Not a sponsored comment 😅
Temu ptsd room
I carried out tests, and the conclusion is simple: the first ssl has more bass and lower mids with a feeling of more body and the 4k sends everything a little more to the front (enhancement in high mids) the ssl mkII there is more definition in transients due to the 32 bits You can feel and hear the dynamic range to define it. It's like having a higher room compared to a room with a lower ceiling, and the transients are more defined but I feel less definition in the low frequencies and less body. As for the output, here the difference is notable, the depths and separation of instruments are better translated in the mkII version, it feels tighter, the sound perception is greater, a better interpretation of the stereo and the frequency range is more balanced.
This is a subjective comment because you base it on feel.
However, if you manage to make measurements and post a comparison video based on objective data, you'll have in your hands a potentially successful one!