Received mine last week. Rackmounted it and hooked it up via adat to my Octopre. This results in 24 inputs and 18 outputs. Routed effects on both aux plus a third set of effects. I have six mono synths and five stereo synths going to the inputs. Left the first two imputs open for guitar and mic. Connected keyboard controller to USB host input and DIN Midi out to my eight output Midi hub. USB to computer and Ableton. My whole studio is finally connected and I can just hit record in Live and capture whatever inspiration hits with any of my instruments and effects without having to spend time moving cables around. It all works great and I feel free to just make music without hassles. It is a great piece of gear.
The Audiofuse latency is better than I expected - with my RME UCX II using the 44.1/512 I get 1102 samples, 24.989ms. The selling point for RME (for me) was stability, though, I run it at 48K 64 samples (4.29ms RTL) and it's been rock solid. And it's only taken me a year to get my head around TotalMix's routing.
I'm looking to buy a new audio interface and I was thinking of going with RME for the longevity of support and low latencies. However, there's the price and less inputs - I'd probably want the UFX II or UFX III. With 4ms RTL does everything always line up in your DAW without needing to use delay compensation or track delay compensation? I was hoping with latency that low I wouldn't need to bother adjusting and compensating as it wouldn't even be noticeable. From the latency figures i've seen Arturia is about double - 7.6ms at 32 samples, 8.9 at 64 samples, 11.6ms at 128 samples. The longer latency probably wouldn't make a difference in reality though If I do have to manually compensate for the latency anyway with the RME. I would love to take a UCX II but i find it a pain that it's only got 8 channels of ADAT.
Totally agree this is a winner. I was mentioning to one of their product people how many of us like to jam on devices (synths, drum machines, etc.) wo the computer and it would be great to have an interface that also was a basic key mixer and they did it! Now I just need to sell some stuff to get it. 😊❤🎉
Someone said that it “has the specs of an apogee ensemble from 2016”, idk how true this is…I was leaning toward the UAD but I really think I want this. I don’t like how the Gain can’t be controlled by midi though. My goal would be to get a control surface and control the mixer with it
That Ensamble was nice tho lol, apogee is always top tier, the symphony mkii been out since 2016, and has yet to be bested by anything. that AKM + ESS combo is truly elite
Same here. I have the OG Clarett 8pre (TB2). I really like that interface but as I've been getting more and more external gear more inputs would be nice.
It’s a neat piece of gear, but by no means revolutionary. MOTU interfaces have a 64 channel mixer with EQ, Compression and Reverb. Have a routing matrix and can be expanded by ADAT and AVB, and using that I’ve built a 104 channel audio interface. 2 x 16A, 2 x 24Ai, an OST-8, Octopre Dynamic, Apollo X6 and Apollo Twin. Rock solid at 48KHz over Thunderbolt 2 into my PC.
I don’t think I said it’s revolutionary - just that it works for my needs - I love MOTU stuff as well, but haven’t used and audio interface - their Midi interfaces are a rock solid backbone for all the hardware in the studio.
@@StarskyCarr yes, didn’t mean to imply you claimed that, and it’s an attractive product. I might be inclined to try them for a planned live setup. I personally use the iConnectivity MioXL for MIDI but I have heard MOTU MIDI interfaces are great. I went the MOTU route for audio because I realized that AVB gave me the expandability I needed.
Why???? Because Arturia nailed it ! It’s a product that synth musicians who work mostly hardware really expected. You can even use it without computer. Amazing. It’s something you ll choose one time and then keep it.
If it there was a way to run two in parallel it would be great. I’m also running an original USD Apollo with two Octapre interfaces connected by ADAT. Two AudioFuse16 would give 32 inputs plus an additional 32 via ADAT. That would allow me to run most of my key synths live into the interface.
If you want to run an aggregate setup, only MAC offers this, with Win it's complicated, but you're going about this the wrong way. You should be looking at the AVB alternative which allows up to 512 channels of I/O.
Hey Starsky, at 9:10 when you showed the zero latency mixer setup, the Out 3 was set to Line and not the specific Direct Thru setting. Was this set for the recording test or did you use Line? If you were set to Line, I'm curious how much would change when using Direct Thru as it seemed pretty bang on.
This vs an RME interface (RME Fireface UCX II is probably most comparable). Anyone have thoughts? RME's insanely good support record is pushing me that way.
Yes I do. I’ve not got the magic ears some seem to have but I think this is on par.. the Apollo is a decade old I guess so no surprise stuff is catching up. I’ve not recorded an orchestra or anything requiring explicit clarity in a live room etc.. they may be identical, all I know is for me it’s the same.
I would balk at this due to pricing here. asking is 2,400 AUD, I have a MOTU 828ES with 2 8200 ADATs that I paid around $1900 for. That's 26 analog in vs 16 for less. Maybe if our local $ was cheaper, then it would be a good alternative, who wouldn't want 32 ins?
I got it and love it but Latency is a bit too high for me. I had change from 64 sample to 128 sample from my other interface and is over 10ms. I need to monitor with Ableton Effects so it's delay AF but I think I'll just cue it for now and pair it with a thunderbolt 8 channel motu this has like 2 ms RT and then I don't have to worry anymore about interfaces hahah
I like Arturia as a company and I think UA is good, but I think they got overhyped because they're expensive and have the processing to sound like this or that.
I was thinking this would be ideal but i'm tempted by the promise of much lower latencies of RME and decades long driver support. Do you still have to manually adjust for global and individual track latency in your DAW whether the latency is 4ms or 30ms when recording external gear so it doesn't really make a difference whether something is 4ms off or 30ms off? I might be misunderstanding how it works a bit. How does the audiofuse work as an adat expander rather than an audio interface? Do you lose all of the functionality? The MOTU 16A seems like a good alternative to audiofuse or a ferrofish pulse 16.
some plugins can introduce latency but each DAW deals with it differently and unless it's a mastering plug in it's usually not a huge problem. In my experience 512 samples introduces way too much latency anyway; 30 ms is barely usable for a vst and not usable for playing with a live microphone. 256 or lower is manageable; the sweet spot is usually 128 or 64; depending on your computer.
@@valdir7426 I'm thinking of it in terms of a DAW midi triggering external hardware synths and getting them to line up correctly with the audio samples and vsts already in your DAW audio. Would the RTL latency figure make a difference in this case - would 3ms mean you didn't need to do any delay compensation or moving things around vs 6ms or 9ms?
@StarskyCarr Do a little test for us: In Logic set up the I/O plugin, assign an input and and output from the AF16 and on the AF16 dead patch that I/O selection (loopback). Press Ping on the Logic I/O plug-in. Now change the sample rate of the session to something else, then back to the original and re-ping. What's the difference? Next, disable Core Audio (settings, audio), reenable, press apply and re-ping. What's the difference there?
I’m not a mastering engineer, but it’s holding up against the Apollo which is industry standard so I would think so. But I don’t know if mastering orchestral for example requires that bit extra - I don’t think so.
No DSP on Arturia is a deal breaker. UAD is all about real time monitoring with all the processing you want (compression, eq, reverbs, deessers etc.) and preamp emulations in real time. Arturia is a pretty basic interface compared to UAD or RME
I've been looking to replace several smaller audio interfaces like the MOTU M2 and M4 plus a couple of Behringer UMC404's with something that combines mixing and an audio interface into a single unit so I'm not using the aggregate audio device in MacOS any longer and can ditch the computer. I've looked at the MOTU offerings and have been thinking about one of the AVB or just a 16a, but then Arturia came out with this so I'm wondering if I should go with the Arturia instead. It really does check off all my boxes and since I get a 30% discount (don't ask) the price isn't too bad. Sigh. Decisions, decisions. The RME doesn't have enough inputs for my needs from what I can tell and I don't want something that requires an additional patch bay - I don't have rack space for that.
this interface is weak and generic\basic overall in comparison with RME (ucx2 for example) dsp, total mix, conversion quality (i mean not chip models (it doesnt matter at all) but engineering) routing capabilities, DRIVERS (!), size, latency - everything is much better with RME. i cant understand people who is going to buy this.. whats wrong with you guys.. buy RME instead of this brick) lol
Received mine last week. Rackmounted it and hooked it up via adat to my Octopre. This results in 24 inputs and 18 outputs. Routed effects on both aux plus a third set of effects. I have six mono synths and five stereo synths going to the inputs. Left the first two imputs open for guitar and mic. Connected keyboard controller to USB host input and DIN Midi out to my eight output Midi hub. USB to computer and Ableton. My whole studio is finally connected and I can just hit record in Live and capture whatever inspiration hits with any of my instruments and effects without having to spend time moving cables around. It all works great and I feel free to just make music without hassles. It is a great piece of gear.
The Audiofuse latency is better than I expected - with my RME UCX II using the 44.1/512 I get 1102 samples, 24.989ms. The selling point for RME (for me) was stability, though, I run it at 48K 64 samples (4.29ms RTL) and it's been rock solid. And it's only taken me a year to get my head around TotalMix's routing.
I'm looking to buy a new audio interface and I was thinking of going with RME for the longevity of support and low latencies. However, there's the price and less inputs - I'd probably want the UFX II or UFX III. With 4ms RTL does everything always line up in your DAW without needing to use delay compensation or track delay compensation? I was hoping with latency that low I wouldn't need to bother adjusting and compensating as it wouldn't even be noticeable. From the latency figures i've seen Arturia is about double - 7.6ms at 32 samples, 8.9 at 64 samples, 11.6ms at 128 samples. The longer latency probably wouldn't make a difference in reality though If I do have to manually compensate for the latency anyway with the RME. I would love to take a UCX II but i find it a pain that it's only got 8 channels of ADAT.
Totally agree this is a winner. I was mentioning to one of their product people how many of us like to jam on devices (synths, drum machines, etc.) wo the computer and it would be great to have an interface that also was a basic key mixer and they did it! Now I just need to sell some stuff to get it. 😊❤🎉
I just got this, going to get it all set up this week. Moved away from UAD to try this. Nice overview.
Apollo X series, are best than arturia series. the converters are top.
Thank you. This is really a great unit that Arturia did. 😍
This is a game changer! Definitely would’ve gotten this for my synth rig over my Apollo’s if I had to start over again.
Someone said that it “has the specs of an apogee ensemble from 2016”, idk how true this is…I was leaning toward the UAD but I really think I want this. I don’t like how the Gain can’t be controlled by midi though. My goal would be to get a control surface and control the mixer with it
That Ensamble was nice tho lol, apogee is always top tier, the symphony mkii been out since 2016, and has yet to be bested by anything. that AKM + ESS combo is truly elite
please release that "disorder" cover featured at the beginning!
This will be my next interface. It seems to address all my needs and things lacking in the Focusrite Clarett 8pre. Definitely want to pick one up!
Ask John for advice, he is really cued in for interfaces.
@@DankePlace LOL
Same here. I have the OG Clarett 8pre (TB2). I really like that interface but as I've been getting more and more external gear more inputs would be nice.
@@apoclypse I agree. More inputs would be nice. There’s little features here and there that are really making me consider it.
Wowwww. If I'm to start again, I'd like this interface. I'm sticking with my MOTU M4.
MOTU really doesn't get the hype these other companies do, and they make great, solid gear.
It’s a neat piece of gear, but by no means revolutionary. MOTU interfaces have a 64 channel mixer with EQ, Compression and Reverb. Have a routing matrix and can be expanded by ADAT and AVB, and using that I’ve built a 104 channel audio interface. 2 x 16A, 2 x 24Ai, an OST-8, Octopre Dynamic, Apollo X6 and Apollo Twin. Rock solid at 48KHz over Thunderbolt 2 into my PC.
I don’t think I said it’s revolutionary - just that it works for my needs - I love MOTU stuff as well, but haven’t used and audio interface - their Midi interfaces are a rock solid backbone for all the hardware in the studio.
@@StarskyCarr yes, didn’t mean to imply you claimed that, and it’s an attractive product. I might be inclined to try them for a planned live setup. I personally use the iConnectivity MioXL for MIDI but I have heard MOTU MIDI interfaces are great. I went the MOTU route for audio because I realized that AVB gave me the expandability I needed.
@@ktreier Motu products sounds really good
I wish rewinding on my interfaces too!
Beautiful Audiifuse 16Rig!
But, Neve 8816, I'm drooling 🤤
neve 8816 ists just a summing unit
cool Ultravox clip :)
I wish it had AVB like the Motu. It will max out at 32 inputs considering the 2 Adat ins.
I hope this interface are not that problematic like their small audiofuse.. i had not the greatest expirience in terms of hardware reliability...
Thank you for the review.
Arturia AudioFuse 16Rig or Motu 828 (2024)?
Why????
Because Arturia nailed it !
It’s a product that synth musicians who work mostly hardware really expected.
You can even use it without computer.
Amazing.
It’s something you ll choose one time and then keep it.
If it there was a way to run two in parallel it would be great. I’m also running an original USD Apollo with two Octapre interfaces connected by ADAT. Two AudioFuse16 would give 32 inputs plus an additional 32 via ADAT. That would allow me to run most of my key synths live into the interface.
If you want to run an aggregate setup, only MAC offers this, with Win it's complicated, but you're going about this the wrong way.
You should be looking at the AVB alternative which allows up to 512 channels of I/O.
Hey Starsky, at 9:10 when you showed the zero latency mixer setup, the Out 3 was set to Line and not the specific Direct Thru setting. Was this set for the recording test or did you use Line? If you were set to Line, I'm curious how much would change when using Direct Thru as it seemed pretty bang on.
It looks awesome and I was really considering it, but then I remembered how horrific Arturia's drivers were with MCC and my BSP.
I really like your video
This vs an RME interface (RME Fireface UCX II is probably most comparable). Anyone have thoughts? RME's insanely good support record is pushing me that way.
Makes me think of Starsky and Hutch😂. GREAT review🎉 I subscribed
Really looking to purchase this myself, because I just can't stop buying hardware! ! =)
Hey Starsky, just wondering if you think the rig 16 conversion and clarity is on par with your Apollo? Thinking of upgrading to the rig 16
Yes I do. I’ve not got the magic ears some seem to have but I think this is on par.. the Apollo is a decade old I guess so no surprise stuff is catching up. I’ve not recorded an orchestra or anything requiring explicit clarity in a live room etc.. they may be identical, all I know is for me it’s the same.
do you use your headphone port a lot? does it drive your headphones well?
I would balk at this due to pricing here. asking is 2,400 AUD, I have a MOTU 828ES with 2 8200 ADATs that I paid around $1900 for.
That's 26 analog in vs 16 for less. Maybe if our local $ was cheaper, then it would be a good alternative, who wouldn't want 32 ins?
I got it and love it but Latency is a bit too high for me. I had change from 64 sample to 128 sample from my other interface and is over 10ms. I need to monitor with Ableton Effects so it's delay AF but I think I'll just cue it for now and pair it with a thunderbolt 8 channel motu this has like 2 ms RT and then I don't have to worry anymore about interfaces hahah
Cool studio
I like Arturia as a company and I think UA is good, but I think they got overhyped because they're expensive and have the processing to sound like this or that.
I own hd600 from Sennheiser. Is this Arturia AudioFuse 16Rig good for a 300 ohm headphone? Thanks
I was thinking this would be ideal but i'm tempted by the promise of much lower latencies of RME and decades long driver support. Do you still have to manually adjust for global and individual track latency in your DAW whether the latency is 4ms or 30ms when recording external gear so it doesn't really make a difference whether something is 4ms off or 30ms off? I might be misunderstanding how it works a bit. How does the audiofuse work as an adat expander rather than an audio interface? Do you lose all of the functionality? The MOTU 16A seems like a good alternative to audiofuse or a ferrofish pulse 16.
some plugins can introduce latency but each DAW deals with it differently and unless it's a mastering plug in it's usually not a huge problem. In my experience 512 samples introduces way too much latency anyway; 30 ms is barely usable for a vst and not usable for playing with a live microphone. 256 or lower is manageable; the sweet spot is usually 128 or 64; depending on your computer.
@@valdir7426 I'm thinking of it in terms of a DAW midi triggering external hardware synths and getting them to line up correctly with the audio samples and vsts already in your DAW audio. Would the RTL latency figure make a difference in this case - would 3ms mean you didn't need to do any delay compensation or moving things around vs 6ms or 9ms?
Neve ❤
@StarskyCarr Do a little test for us: In Logic set up the I/O plugin, assign an input and and output from the AF16 and on the AF16 dead patch that I/O selection (loopback). Press Ping on the Logic I/O plug-in. Now change the sample rate of the session to something else, then back to the original and re-ping. What's the difference? Next, disable Core Audio (settings, audio), reenable, press apply and re-ping. What's the difference there?
Can it be used with midi 2 hardware?
Is it mastering grade?
I’m not a mastering engineer, but it’s holding up against the Apollo which is industry standard so I would think so. But I don’t know if mastering orchestral for example requires that bit extra - I don’t think so.
Please tell me the big Knob isn't made out of Arturia Rubber ☠️
Haha that’s a good point … no! 😂
No DSP on Arturia is a deal breaker. UAD is all about real time monitoring with all the processing you want (compression, eq, reverbs, deessers etc.) and preamp emulations in real time. Arturia is a pretty basic interface compared to UAD or RME
I've been looking to replace several smaller audio interfaces like the MOTU M2 and M4 plus a couple of Behringer UMC404's with something that combines mixing and an audio interface into a single unit so I'm not using the aggregate audio device in MacOS any longer and can ditch the computer. I've looked at the MOTU offerings and have been thinking about one of the AVB or just a 16a, but then Arturia came out with this so I'm wondering if I should go with the Arturia instead. It really does check off all my boxes and since I get a 30% discount (don't ask) the price isn't too bad. Sigh. Decisions, decisions. The RME doesn't have enough inputs for my needs from what I can tell and I don't want something that requires an additional patch bay - I don't have rack space for that.
16 xlr inputs, and this would be a no brainer...
heh, i wouldn't give up my UADs...
this interface is weak and generic\basic overall in comparison with RME (ucx2 for example)
dsp, total mix, conversion quality (i mean not chip models (it doesnt matter at all) but engineering)
routing capabilities, DRIVERS (!), size, latency - everything is much better with RME.
i cant understand people who is going to buy this..
whats wrong with you guys..
buy RME instead of this brick) lol
You lost me when you said the price. Really overpriced!
It's really not. Am going to consolidate my setup with this (selling UAD and a mixer too). It's a solid piece of hardware 👌