Firewire or USB?? and couple more questions

skiscem · #1 01-06-2008, 04:04 AM

So yeah im getting into the world of recording, i have a pretty decent pc and im looking for a recording interface, i have a few options in mind and they are both usb and firewire, i know firewire is faster than usb but what are the real facts and diferences between using Usb and firewire

wich one would you recommend?

im also open to suggestions for the interface, i need something with decent sound, compatible with mac and pc and under 250 bucks

Thanks a lot!

meev992 · #2 01-06-2008, 04:23 AM

besides speed, firewire is more stable.

However, I prefer to keep everything USB, so that I can take my recording gear to other computers.

hunta · #3 01-06-2008, 10:23 AM

At $250 or under, none of the interfaces look real attractive to me personally. At $300 you've got your choice of a Focusrite Saffire (not the LE without DSP), or a Presonus Firebox, both of which are real good interfaces. They're both firewire (which I recommend) but you need a suitable firewire card to support it. If you don't have Texas Instruments firewire, you'll need to get an add-in card which uses a TI chip. I would avoid USB unless you have no other options. You can read up on any of the major recording forums about the merits of FW vs. USB (gearslutz, soundonsound, futureproducers, etc). Basically FW is just a more robust technology, FW vs. USB is like SCSI vs. IDE.

i_got_a_mohawk · #4 01-06-2008, 07:04 PM

TI isnt the only firewire chip which works . . . my comp doesnt have one, and i dont have a problem (granted i did, but i think it was a mix of antivirus and wireless being active at the same time as the interface).

And on track.

Firewire FTW

(i like presonus too)

If you do go USB, the M-Audio Fast Track Pro is pretty good

Dbassmon · #5 01-06-2008, 07:37 PM

Fire wire is the way to go. Latency is a term you may have heard. It's a slight delay between playing a note and hearing it slightly delayed. It very distracting and very difficult to groove to and it's more of a problem with USB.

I have an M-Audio Firewire 410, works very well. I think you can find them refurbed on Musiciansfriend for $249.00

Jared92 · #6 01-06-2008, 08:12 PM

Hands down Firwire. For example. The otherday, i was fixing someones iPod (i do that for some extra cash on the side, of none...) And i loaded a library of tunes on USB. And after about 7-10 seconds 2 songs had transferd. I said, "Gay!" so i switched to firewire. And viola 7-10 seconds later 120+ song had been transferd.

~Jared

meev992 · #7 01-06-2008, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jared92

And viola 7-10 seconds later 120+ song had been transferd.

~Jared

wow, USB 2.0 just got a 400 Megabit b^tch-slap

i_got_a_mohawk · #8 01-06-2008, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dbassmon

Fire wire is the way to go. Latency is a term you may have heard. It's a slight delay between playing a note and hearing it slightly delayed. It very distracting and very difficult to groove to and it's more of a problem with USB.

I have an M-Audio Firewire 410, works very well. I think you can find them refurbed on Musiciansfriend for $249.00

My mates M-Audio fast track (on a laptop, run of the mill, nothing special), was showing a latencty of 8ms . Granted, can get quicker with firewire (im usually sitting down about 4ms), and so could he probably if he tuned the laptop.

However, id still say go with firewire if you can afford!

treebranch13 · #9 01-06-2008, 11:02 PM

FIREWIRE IS NOT FASTER THAN USB.
USB 2.0 has a max upload rate of 480mb/sec
Firewire 400 has a max upoad rate of 400mb/sec
now firewire 800, on the the other hand, has a upload rate of 800mb/sec.

there you go.

msquared · #10 01-06-2008, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by treebranch13

FIREWIRE IS NOT FASTER THAN USB.
USB 2.0 has a max upload rate of 480mb/sec
Firewire 400 has a max upoad rate of 400mb/sec
now firewire 800, on the the other hand, has a upload rate of 800mb/sec.

there you go.

..but you're talking about bandwidth, you're not talking about latency. "Fast" is either a measure of latency by itself or (sometimes) a combination of latency and bandwidth. Unless you're an advertising executive, of course.

If you take a Porsche 911 and a Dodge Grand Caravan and try to figure out which of the two is going to haul five kids to soccer practice more quickly, which vehicle will win? See, it gets tricky.

If you're recording one channel for demo purposes, USB wins. If you're going into multiple simultaneous channels, firewire wins. There is a lot of science and "what if" behind it, which you'll see if you're willing to use the search engine.

hbarcat · #11 01-10-2008, 12:29 AM

USB is limited to stereo recording.

You'll need Firewire for more than two simultaneous channels.

treebranch13 · #12 01-10-2008, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msquared

..but you're talking about bandwidth, you're not talking about latency. "Fast" is either a measure of latency by itself or (sometimes) a combination of latency and bandwidth. Unless you're an advertising executive, of course.

If you take a Porsche 911 and a Dodge Grand Caravan and try to figure out which of the two is going to haul five kids to soccer practice more quickly, which vehicle will win? See, it gets tricky.

If you're recording one channel for demo purposes, USB wins. If you're going into multiple simultaneous channels, firewire wins. There is a lot of science and "what if" behind it, which you'll see if you're willing to use the search engine.

what is latency? and an advertising executive. darn you caught me! i endorse all things on the bass cleft and low end

meev992 · #13 01-10-2008, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by treebranch13

what is latency?

Latency is the length of time required for a woman to complete any activity.

i_got_a_mohawk · #14 01-10-2008, 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by treebranch13

FIREWIRE IS NOT FASTER THAN USB.
USB 2.0 has a max upload rate of 480mb/sec
Firewire 400 has a max upoad rate of 400mb/sec
now firewire 800, on the the other hand, has a upload rate of 800mb/sec.

there you go.

When transfering anything over USB 2.0, i have never seen it getting anywhere near 480mb/sec.

Backup a 500Gb harddrive to an external USB 2.0 HDD and to a Firewire HDD. Which one will be finished backing up first? The Firewire will win by about 3-4 days

i_got_a_mohawk · #15 01-10-2008, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msquared

If you're recording one channel for demo purposes, USB wins. If you're going into multiple simultaneous channels, firewire wins. There is a lot of science and "what if" behind it, which you'll see if you're willing to use the search engine.

If your recording one channel, im pretty sure either could handle it without batting an eyelid ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by meev992

Latency is the length of time required for a woman to complete any activity.

Not quite, its the length of time taken from you asking her to do the activity, to her doing it

DocBop · #16 01-10-2008, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by treebranch13

FIREWIRE IS NOT FASTER THAN USB.
USB 2.0 has a max upload rate of 480mb/sec
Firewire 400 has a max upoad rate of 400mb/sec
now firewire 800, on the the other hand, has a upload rate of 800mb/sec.

there you go.

FW is asynchronous and USB is only synchronous that makes a difference. If FW wasn't better why are all the higher-end interfaces FW?

kevinmoore73 · #17 01-10-2008, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by treebranch13

FIREWIRE IS NOT FASTER THAN USB.
USB 2.0 has a max upload rate of 480mb/sec
Firewire 400 has a max upoad rate of 400mb/sec
now firewire 800, on the the other hand, has a upload rate of 800mb/sec.

there you go.

On paper, USB 2.0 certainly appears faster. After you account for USB 2.0's overhead, you'll find that Firewire is actually *always* faster.

As someone else said in this thread, if you were to do a backup "race" between Firewire 400 and USB 2.0, the Firewire 400 transfer would win by a long shot.

I have a 30GB 3rd-gen iPod with a Firewire interface. I also have a 60GB 5th-gen iPod with a USB 2.0 interface. Transfers to the Firewire iPod take a lot less time than my USB iPod.

Also, if USB 2.0 is so great, why can't you buy a USB 2.0 interface that supports more than two channels at a time?

Rickett Customs · #18 01-10-2008, 10:18 AM

Here are some breakdowns:

Firewire:
1. 100 Mbit/s 200Mbit/s 400Mbit/s supported.
2. Works without control, devices communicate peer-to-peer.(asynchronous)
3. Cable up to 4.5 m.
4. Up to 63 devices supported.
5. Power supply to external devices is 1.25A/12V (max.).
6. The only computer bus used in digital video cameras.

Usb 2.0:
1. 1.5 Mbit/s 12Mbit/s 480Mbit/s supported.
2. USB controller is required to control the bus and data transfer.(synchronous)
3. Cable up to 5 m.
4. Up to 127 devices supported.
5. Power supply to external devices is 500 mA/5V (max).
6. Full compatibility with USB 1.1 devices.

Multi track recorders mostly employ Firewire (8 or more tracks at a time), for the fact that
USB 2.0 recorders on the market, primarily can record only up to 2 tracks at a time, it is possible to do more than 2, though it is "sketchy at best".

As far as interfaces, Firewire is the norm for me (Protools LE w/ 002 factory console). However, I do not use firewire or firewire 800, for external disks, I use E-sata (way faster than any of these protocols put together).