IMPORTANT INFORMATION: When you use direct monitoring on the UMC202HD you will only hear channel 1 on the left and channel 2 on the right in your headphones. Same goes for the output on the back. With direct monitoring it is not possible to get a mono mix into your headphones or your output. This can be quite anoying and might be a deal breaker for some people!
@@shrestha754 Hey, the direct monitoring feature works fine, but it has a quirk. Let's say you connect a mic to channel 1 and an instrument to channel 2. When you activate direct monitoring you will hear the sound of the mic on your left ear only and the instrument only on your right ear. This might be weird for some people.
@@adzhikerimov Hey, sadly that does not work because it is a hardware problem. Direct monitoring on the interface works by routing the incoming audio straight to the ouput, so that you can hear it without any delay. The direct monitoring audio can not be changed by software settings. Cheers!
To anyone checking back here... Behringer released a new windows 10 driver a month or two ago and it fixed many problems I and some other people were having with this model and umc404hd. Since that driver update it has been smooth sailing here, before that it was usable but sometimes would glitch when exiting ASIO applications or just randomly reset.
Well I got a different problem. While the Behringer site gives you a list of drivers it gives no indication of which one you need or even what their dates are. Assuming the higher version number was the most recent, I downloaded that one and got nothing (Windows 7 Pro). Looking around further it turns out you're supposed to go into your sound controls and check the 202 as "default" recording device. The first Behringer setup video I saw never mentioned that, the second one did. When I did that the 202 came in and sounded very clean. I was concerned that by calling it "default", my old Lexicon interface would no longer work, but that was not the case, so that was all good, and apparently "default" does not mean "default". I guess it actually means "enable". However when I ran exactly the same process on another laptop (Windows 8), which is the main system I record on, not only did the 202 not show up, but now the Lexicon no longer shows up either, so now *nothing* works. Now I have to figure out how to undo a driver install, or perhaps just do a complete system restore to at least get the old Lexicon working again so I have SOMETHING. I'm not happy with having to jump through all these exotic hoops.
@@robertleeluben Thanks Robert -- in this case the errant computer happened to have just been cleaned up in prep for the fall season before I went in there (and I guess I'll have to do that again, couldn't hurt). The other one where it worked was at the time still waiting for its maintenance. I'm tending to suspect it wants a different driver for 8 than for 7Pro. I dunno.
The followup from last week -- somehow I got the Win8 recording laptop to see the driver but I'm not at all sure what I did to effect that. Then when I went to the recording site thinking all was ready, the 202 again did not show up, and I had to shift to another laptop to get started. Turned out I had to go into Control Panel *again* and re-designate the 202 as "default", which I had already done before but the laptop " forgot" by itself. Live and learn, but this designated driver instability is kind of a hassle. Never had this issue with the Lexicon Alpha.
Quantitative measurement is key. This guy provides a much better comparison between interfaces (between his videos) than most qualitative reviews out there. What would really top off the quantitative comparsion is a latency comparison, although this is subject to time-dependent variables like "what's the most recent driver," in addition to PC specs which can at least be held constant for the life of your PC. Thanks, man.
That security lock is used in shops when they put it out, that's how they attach a metal wire to it so it doesn't get stolen. That also exists on laptops usw
Excellent review. I picked one up on the basis of your info and was NOT dissapointed...excellent rig for the $$, and yes, the build quality is really good. Thanks Julian. Out goes the Personus and it's lousy preamps.
Because of this video, I got myself a UMC202HD and it arrived today. I was unable to read the comment on the direct monitoring not having a mix going to both L&R. Agree that it was rather annoying but I can deal with it especially since I mostly deal with voice. Thanks, JK! and I also mentioned you on my video!
I own a UMC204HD and a second generation Focusrite Scarlett 18i20. I find myself coming back to the UMC204HD constantly because the ASIO control panel is much more simplified and it sounds great. It runs more stable than my Focusrite. I did not expect that from a $130 interface. The recent acquisitions made by Behringer and the new factory are really enabling them to make great products now. I wish their name hasn't been tarnished from their early years. Anyway, home recording enthusiasts should give these interfaces a try - they're such a good value.
I love mine. Much better than it should be for the price. Wide dynamic range, low noise, 24bit capability. It has some quirks--such as the completely separated channels on direct monitoring--but there are easy workarounds. I love mine.
@@outtassio I simply don't use it. My DAW is Cakewalk. I am able to achieve a low enough latency for me on my setup that I can use input monitoring in software. I rarely use more than one input at a time on the interface. If I have my mic plugged into Input 1, I send it to a mono track where it is panned to centre by default. If I monitor through the software, I hear myself centred. If I use direct monitoring I just hear myself on the left channel. The other workaround is to go through a mixer. I send the left channel of the mixer to Input 1 and the right to Input 2. I set the gain on the interface so the the level is balanced in both channels, and this way with direct monitoring I hear the stereo mix of what is coming out of my mixer according to the levels and pannings on the mixer. This time I can send to interface output to a stereo track or each channel to its own mono track. But even here I don't use the direct monitoring. My latency is acceptable enough that I turn monitoring on in software. The short answer is that my workaround is that I don't use the interfaces non-centred non-blendable direct monitoring and I monitor my inputs otherwise.
It's not easy to find so short, but overfilled with usefull information video on UA-cam. Thank you for your time and saving our time. One question - are TRS outputs on backside equiped with balance?
Thank you for this. I have the UMC22 and stopped using it in favor of a Tascam DR-40 simply for portability purposes. After seeing your video on the Tascam DR-40x, I've decided to give my UMC22 another chance.
Noise is like all that really matters bc you can boost low noise audio anyway so idk why no one measures noise in their reviews they just generally say its good or bad which could be caused by many factors. It doesnt matter how good or bad something is if there is bad noise anything you boost or add effects to will make it worse. Thanks for the review.
There is a new driver for this audio interface that allows you to record the inputs as: Input 1/2 as L/R in a single stereo source Input 1 as a mono source Input 2 as a mono source It is very cool that they are still supporting this with driver updates.
2:00 since you pointed out the Kensington lock: I love how that lock is right next to one of the three Phillips head screws you need to remove to detach the backplate and the Kensington lock from the rest of the device. 😂
Great job, Julian. If people want to know what this interface sounds like with singing, here is an exaple of a song that I did with the Behringer UMC202HD. The mic was a GLS Audio ES57. This song was mastered by computer. This sounds very different that with the SM7b It shows the capabiility of this little Behringer interface. ua-cam.com/video/tUMieGC32-0/v-deo.html
Hey, thanks for this! Nothing wasted, and everything to the point. My AI said that there's zero latency problem with direct monitoring, so if I bend a note then I hear it in real time thru the interface, so...there's that. It's a good thing.
Thanks for another great video Julian. A couple of confirmations... If your are just recording a single mic you will only hear direct on one side? There is no way to adjust the input/mix level ratio for direct monitoring?
Thank you for a detailed review. Can you please make review a video on UMC204HD Vs UMC202HD? Also, please make comparison videos with top 7 or top 10 audio interfaces below $200?
I had the 204hd for a week, loads of outputs and great quality. But I felt the DAC performance lagged behind the Mackie Onyx I had before that, so I sent it back and bought a Mackie onyx producer, definitely a clearer DAC performance. However the value for money is awesome ...
Thanks for the info. I ordered this today. I have Windows 10 Pro. I'm guessing from the vid I may have to install the drivers twice? Also, do the drivers come with the interface?
@Julian Krause, thanks a lot for the great in-depth reviews you do! One quick question: I currently have a Line6 POD Studio UX2 and I'm thinking about going for this Behringer UMC202HD. Do you think that's an upgrade or should I keep my Line6 POD Studio UX2 instead? Thanks a lot in advance! Cheers!
This is a great review of the item! I was looking for assistance for a friend looking to upgrade to it and you addresssed the problems I had with my own Behringer. Great job :)
Great review! On the Behringer UHD404HD video, you talk about poor THD performance when approaching the max signal level. In your testing did you discover whether the UMC202HD suffers from the same issue? Thank you.
This just blew my mind a little bit. I mean, obviously this interface is in not exactly what anyone would claim to be "ideal" in most scenarios, but where it dose "shine"? Is kind of where it counts. Especially for someone w/ a limited budget, or a kid chasing their dreams and aspirations. Definitely punches well above it's price point, and genuinely higher than I would of assumed prior to watching this. I'm actually kind of impressed TBH. I love your content BTW Julian. I regularly find myself here at the end of any random interface wormhole. Ha! Good stuff.
An in-depth and Excellent review! Thankyou so much for your efforts! This will be my first audio interface ever (gonna order it soon) so i have a question. Do i strictly need Monitor speakers for sound output? Or will normal speakers connected to the speaker out (green out) of MoBo work? PS. I do have Audio technica monior headphones for direct monitoring.
Hey, glad you liked my review! You do not strictly need monitor speakers. If you already got some speakers hooked up to your PC they will still work fine. But if you want to connect speakers to the interface they have to be active speakers with a buit in amplifier.
Julian, I started in electronics in 1976, but since 1981 made my living in IT. Now I have a little A/V studio for fun, with mixer, a few Behringer UMC.. interfaces etc. On my UMC404 and 202 I noticed that while it has low self noise the mic inputs are shit. I gave you my background to say that I now how to isolate problems. Specifically using condenser mics, the high pitch static on these devices is horrible if the wire is touched. Using everything the same except the UMC404 or 202 with other interfaces when the mic wire is touched it's heard but not with that horrible high pitch static. I assume it's the price point of these boxes somewhere before it gets to the preamp itself? I know it's happening, and tested on multiple units, but wanted your thoughts. I see nothing on this anywhere.
Hi there and thanks for this in-depth honest review video. I stupidly bought a condenser mic kit that already has external phantom power with it (Neewer NW-800). Total newbie looking to start a podcast. Would you honestly recommend that I fork out another 25 € for the 202HD - is there notable difference that I could later use with a more professional mic? Pls let me know, I'd hate to buy yet another wrong piece of gear :-( Cheers buddy!
There is one thing about noise measurements, which I don't get. Nevermind the EIN, i am talking actual noise readings here. I've tested the Behringer UMC202HD HD and the Steinberg UR22 Mk II, which to my experience have pretty much the same gain. And i tested them with and without the Titanaudio Fethead. I used my RØDE Procaster microphone to set the gain for a signal of -20dBFS at normal talking Volume. After that, i unplugged the microphone and went for the DMX Terminator Plug (110 Ohms) solution to have a somewhat comparable noise reading. On the Steinberg UR22 MK II, the outcome was, what I did expect. -79 ~ -74dBFS with no Fethead and the Gain set to ~91%. And -85/-83dBFS with the Fethead and the Gain set to ~28%. So yea, the Fethead reduced the noise i had quite drastically. And while the Behringer UMC202HD did give me what i expected, with no difference between the reading with and the one without the fethead, the outcome was still weird. Why was the UMC202HD, with a reading of -79/-76dBFS on both tests noisier, than the reading from the UR22 Mk II with the fethead? And knowing the infamous quietnes of the SM7B, i went on and did the same tests with 100% full Gain without the Fethead and ~40% Gain with the Fethead. And i didnt even went on and did the comparison with the UR22 Mk II, because of this: Without the Fethead at 100%, i got a reading of -70/-65dBFS. I remember you saying, that there is no need for a Fethead on the UMC202HD. But the reading I got with the Fethead and the Gain set even to 50% seems to prove you wrong, because I get a reading of -77/-72dBFS. With 7dBFS of difference in the intensity of the noise, how can there be no need for a Fethead or a similar device here?
Thank you, Julian, for a very informative, easy to understand and technically accurate explanation of the Behringer interface. I have just purchased the UMC204HD, and overall it is a very nice interface. However, the noise seems to be very high. When I have nothing plugged into the inputs I get noise levels of about -90 dBFS with the gain knobs turned to their minimum, and about -56 dBFS with the gain knobs turned to their maximum. (I'm measuring the noise level with the vMix live streaming software.) The hiss is also quite audible in the headphones, especially when the gain knob is set to about 60% or more. Comparing these figures with what you report, the noise is very high. Is there perhaps some setting that I need to adjust, or is it possible that there is something wrong with this particular device, or is this just normal for the Behringer UMC204HD? (One of the reasons I bought it was for the low noise levels!) I would appreciate greatly if you have a minute or two to reply.
First of all, great review! It was quite professional and you were very clear and concise. I actually just got this audio interface today and it seems pretty good. My only problems with it so far as that it seems like I need a lot of gain (at least 65-70%) in order to get good recordings for both my guitar and voice. I am using a dynamic microphone (Samson Q2U), so that might explain why it needs more gain. I'm using direct input for the guitar of course, and it still needs quite a lot of gain. Also, when using this audio interface for listening to things through my headphones, there is a slightly high hissing sound that is barely present when the headphone levels are below 50% and when they are roughly 60 percent. Other than that, this seems like a good audio interface, but I really hate having to use at least 65% gain in order to get good audio with my mic. I'm not sure if this is normal or if I'm doing something wrong, so any help would be greatly appreciated.
@@JulianKrause Yeah, good point. I'll do some more tests with the gain set a bit higher and see what happens. Besides, I can always use the pad, if need be. Thanks, for the great review.
ok im gonna buy this, i sold the um2 cause i need to xlr inputs so this seems quite good.. i dont need fancy leds in the front panel, i need a decent preamp and enough gain for a dynamic mic
This interface doesn't have reconstruction filters after DAC's. At least on the rear outputs. The output signal is a high ultrasonic frequency MESS! If you planning to connect PA system with wide frequency response, you can burn your tweeter speakers at high volume! Other than that... as a recording interface is pretty good for the price point.
Hey Julian, Great channel! Really like what you're doing! I have a Beyerdynamic MC840 mic with a dbx 286 S pre-amp. I use the Behringer as for A/D conversion (through the line-input). The low EIN (which you faithfully speak of and show in all your vids) i.c.w. the low price convinced me to buy this over the Focusrite..... or any other A/D converter. I know that normally with a mic like the Beyer you would a different, more expensive setup, but for voice-over work this ROCKS for me :-) Keep up the good work neighbour :-) S.
Great video review, top quality information, and not JUST lifted hopefully off the spec sheet! (In automobile circles they talk of 'power at the glove box', i.e. quoted horsepower in the handbook!) Thank you for going to such lengths to help your audience - you certainly know your stuff :-) Do you have any experience with using this type of product with Linux platforms, notably (I guess) drivers?
Thanks very much for the video. It's super informative. I was just wondering if you can choose which inputs gets phantom power, for example, if I wanted to plug in a condenser and a dynamic mic at the same time.
No, that's not possible. You can only switch the phantom power for both inputs simultaneously. That's usually not a problem though, because dynamic mics don't care if the phantom power is turnd on or not. So, if you use can use a condenser and dynamic mic simultaneously.
I have been happy with my UMC202HD, but as I am an audio novice, I did encounter lots of problems with clicks and pops early-on. I believe I was just at that level of output where the Behringer will overdrive and pop, even though the levels looked good on the computer. Now that I have lowered the levels a bit, and use computer software to set my levels where I need them (I use Voicemeeter Banana into OBS), I have a much better audio quality than I originally did. Not sure if my choice is the best, but I'm running 24-bit/48 and buffer is at 1024. I have no idea if this is correct, but it works, with a very slight latency adjustment to my audio/video in OBS.
I bought one, used. Almost 1 year using it now. Never have problem apart from headphones pot start to make noise on some position, but it get cleared after playing the position. I guess the pots are the weakest point on this interface, better not to leave it on same position for a long time. Not using it for any serious production, but the output itself is already a big upgrade from output on motherboard. Behringer driver seems really well built, although it's very simple in terms of features.
Awesome review as always. I have learned a lot about audio interface thanks to all of your videos. I would like to ask you a question. Which one would you recommend : Behringer UMC202HD, Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 and Steinberg UR22C. I hope you are going to recommend the Behringer model because I did notice it have the lowest noise floor. It's also the most affordable in my country. Thanks
1. Would this audio interface be a good choice for podcasting ? or recording of audio in general ? 2. Why do so many seem to swear by the Focusrite 2i2 ? is there any difference in build or sound quality ? thanks a bunch :D
I think the 2i4 is the better choice for podcasting because you can properly monitor the audio. Not only on one side of the headphones. The 2i2 has better headphone output quality. The recording quality is very similar.
@@JulianKrause please explain how,the headphone output quality differs, I thought it was frequency and resistance that made the headphone quality.Im not to familiar with the output quality, or is the behringer limited to 48khz headphone output, the distortion you discussed in an earlier reply or is there something else?
Hey Julian. I'm looking to start my home studio and I just watched your M-Audio 192|4 Review. Just a quick question. Which one do you prefer for a beginner studio like mine? This one the Behringer UMC202 or the M-Audio 192?
Hi, I'm about to buy this interface, but I need to know wheter the TRS inputs, when used as line, are mono or stereo. For example, will I have to plug each channel of my tape deck in a different input, or a stereo Jack plugged in just one input would work? Thanks
Hey, the TRS inputs are balanced mono inputs. You have two channels on this interface and if you want to record a stereo signal, the left and right signal would need go into a seperate input. I imagine your tape deck has RCA outputs. In this case you would need to use a cable like this: www.thomann.de/de/cordial_cfu_15_pc.htm?sid=c123dce9a4bd1c88bc650a3840270469
Nice review video man! Would you recommend this over the scarlett solo? They are priced the same in my country so I was wondering which would be a better buy.
Yeah, that's a hard choice between the 202HD and the solo. If you really only need one input the solo seems to be a good choice. But for the same price you get two inputs on the 202HD. So, if you know that you need two inputs at some point, the 202HD is the better choice. But it has one big downside: When you use direct monitoring on the UMC202HD you will only hear channel 1 on the left and channel 2 on the right in your headphones. This might be a dealbreaker for you.
@@JulianKrause Thank you for the reply. I guess I'll go for the solo then, I believe it has two inputs one for an xlr and one for guitar...but if I go higher is it worth it to get the 204hd or the 2i2? I'm planning to record music with guitar and vocals.
@@giovcarrillo4222 Depends on whether you need the two inputs. I would say: If you only need one mic input and a guitar input the solo is a good choice. If you need more inputs but you can't spend more, then go with the UMC202HD. If you need two inputs and you have a little bit more mone, the UMC204HD is very good, because it doesn't have the monitoring problem as the UMC202HD. I would only recommend the 2i2 if you have the money and like the little higher build quality.
I have a high pitched whine (around 10kHz) coming out of my UMC202HD phones output 🙁 Tested on multiple computers. It disappeares when the knob is in a sweetspot which is at around 60%, so I keep it around that value.
Hey, if you want you can have a look at the review I did about the 2i2 here: ua-cam.com/video/FdH5cnjmfUc/v-deo.html In short, the 2i2 and the UMC202HD are pretty close in terms of audio performance.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION:
When you use direct monitoring on the UMC202HD you will only hear channel 1 on the left and channel 2 on the right in your headphones. Same goes for the output on the back. With direct monitoring it is not possible to get a mono mix into your headphones or your output. This can be quite anoying and might be a deal breaker for some people!
Julian Krause hey brother thanks for the heads up, so you mean there’s just no way that we can properly direct monitor ourselves when recording?
@@shrestha754 Hey, the direct monitoring feature works fine, but it has a quirk. Let's say you connect a mic to channel 1 and an instrument to channel 2. When you activate direct monitoring you will hear the sound of the mic on your left ear only and the instrument only on your right ear. This might be weird for some people.
Ohh I see what you mean. Thanks for convincing me to get this pretty interface!
@@JulianKrause And if you select only one channel in the driver settings, as in UMС22? or is there no such thing?
@@adzhikerimov Hey, sadly that does not work because it is a hardware problem. Direct monitoring on the interface works by routing the incoming audio straight to the ouput, so that you can hear it without any delay. The direct monitoring audio can not be changed by software settings. Cheers!
To anyone checking back here... Behringer released a new windows 10 driver a month or two ago and it fixed many problems I and some other people were having with this model and umc404hd. Since that driver update it has been smooth sailing here, before that it was usable but sometimes would glitch when exiting ASIO applications or just randomly reset.
Well I got a different problem. While the Behringer site gives you a list of drivers it gives no indication of which one you need or even what their dates are. Assuming the higher version number was the most recent, I downloaded that one and got nothing (Windows 7 Pro). Looking around further it turns out you're supposed to go into your sound controls and check the 202 as "default" recording device. The first Behringer setup video I saw never mentioned that, the second one did. When I did that the 202 came in and sounded very clean. I was concerned that by calling it "default", my old Lexicon interface would no longer work, but that was not the case, so that was all good, and apparently "default" does not mean "default". I guess it actually means "enable".
However when I ran exactly the same process on another laptop (Windows 8), which is the main system I record on, not only did the 202 not show up, but now the Lexicon no longer shows up either, so now *nothing* works. Now I have to figure out how to undo a driver install, or perhaps just do a complete system restore to at least get the old Lexicon working again so I have SOMETHING. I'm not happy with having to jump through all these exotic hoops.
@@notvalidcharacters I had problems like that before with having multiple sound interfaces, cleaning the registry with ccleaner fixed it.
@@robertleeluben Thanks Robert -- in this case the errant computer happened to have just been cleaned up in prep for the fall season before I went in there (and I guess I'll have to do that again, couldn't hurt). The other one where it worked was at the time still waiting for its maintenance. I'm tending to suspect it wants a different driver for 8 than for 7Pro. I dunno.
The followup from last week -- somehow I got the Win8 recording laptop to see the driver but I'm not at all sure what I did to effect that. Then when I went to the recording site thinking all was ready, the 202 again did not show up, and I had to shift to another laptop to get started. Turned out I had to go into Control Panel *again* and re-designate the 202 as "default", which I had already done before but the laptop " forgot" by itself. Live and learn, but this designated driver instability is kind of a hassle. Never had this issue with the Lexicon Alpha.
How does the ASIO driver handles live guitar effects, like guitar rig? Please help, its very difficult to find information about this. Thanks!
Quantitative measurement is key. This guy provides a much better comparison between interfaces (between his videos) than most qualitative reviews out there. What would really top off the quantitative comparsion is a latency comparison, although this is subject to time-dependent variables like "what's the most recent driver," in addition to PC specs which can at least be held constant for the life of your PC. Thanks, man.
That security lock is used in shops when they put it out, that's how they attach a metal wire to it so it doesn't get stolen. That also exists on laptops usw
also in schools and studios
Dude used "und so weiter" in an english sentence, lol. Naja, nicht so schlimm.
@@viktor330 Ich bin Schüler, usw ist eine Geheimwaffe ;)
Excellent review. I picked one up on the basis of your info and was NOT dissapointed...excellent rig for the $$, and yes, the build quality is really good. Thanks Julian. Out goes the Personus and it's lousy preamps.
I picked up the 404 HD assuming the quality is on the same level thank you so much for the review!!!!!!
I love this channel, it's so helpful and professional. Thank you Julian!
Because of this video, I got myself a UMC202HD and it arrived today. I was unable to read the comment on the direct monitoring not having a mix going to both L&R. Agree that it was rather annoying but I can deal with it especially since I mostly deal with voice. Thanks, JK! and I also mentioned you on my video!
Thank you for all your work to provide in-depth reviews.
good review. I would have loved to know how good was the latency RTL.?
I own a UMC204HD and a second generation Focusrite Scarlett 18i20. I find myself coming back to the UMC204HD constantly because the ASIO control panel is much more simplified and it sounds great. It runs more stable than my Focusrite. I did not expect that from a $130 interface. The recent acquisitions made by Behringer and the new factory are really enabling them to make great products now. I wish their name hasn't been tarnished from their early years. Anyway, home recording enthusiasts should give these interfaces a try - they're such a good value.
HELLO what about in terms of quality is the behringer almost as good as the focusrite
I love mine. Much better than it should be for the price. Wide dynamic range, low noise, 24bit capability. It has some quirks--such as the completely separated channels on direct monitoring--but there are easy workarounds. I love mine.
Hi, Les! Sorry, I didn't get what you meant with "easy workaround"; Did you fix the problem with the separated channels on direct monitoring?
@@outtassio I simply don't use it. My DAW is Cakewalk. I am able to achieve a low enough latency for me on my setup that I can use input monitoring in software. I rarely use more than one input at a time on the interface. If I have my mic plugged into Input 1, I send it to a mono track where it is panned to centre by default. If I monitor through the software, I hear myself centred. If I use direct monitoring I just hear myself on the left channel.
The other workaround is to go through a mixer. I send the left channel of the mixer to Input 1 and the right to Input 2. I set the gain on the interface so the the level is balanced in both channels, and this way with direct monitoring I hear the stereo mix of what is coming out of my mixer according to the levels and pannings on the mixer. This time I can send to interface output to a stereo track or each channel to its own mono track. But even here I don't use the direct monitoring. My latency is acceptable enough that I turn monitoring on in software.
The short answer is that my workaround is that I don't use the interfaces non-centred non-blendable direct monitoring and I monitor my inputs otherwise.
@@leswright4108 I see... thanks for this complete explanation! 😃
This is great. I needed technical specifications for my UMC204HD and this gave me a ball park figure to work with. Thank you Julian.
Never seen so good and in depth technical review :) thanks man
Amazing work Julian! What a professional and enjoyable video you created, thank you.
Behringer should pay you because you made an honest review including adequate tests which all combined made me to decide buying one of these. Thanks!
How do you know they didnt pay?
@@Gospel.Songs.42 He legally has to mention if he was paid to make a review
I was also pleasantly surprised by this model, it is excellent value for money, and works like a champion
Bought it because of your reviews, thank you very much!!
It's not easy to find so short, but overfilled with usefull information video on UA-cam. Thank you for your time and saving our time. One question - are TRS outputs on backside equiped with balance?
Thank you for this. I have the UMC22 and stopped using it in favor of a Tascam DR-40 simply for portability purposes. After seeing your video on the Tascam DR-40x, I've decided to give my UMC22 another chance.
Noise is like all that really matters bc you can boost low noise audio anyway so idk why no one measures noise in their reviews they just generally say its good or bad which could be caused by many factors. It doesnt matter how good or bad something is if there is bad noise anything you boost or add effects to will make it worse. Thanks for the review.
There is a new driver for this audio interface that allows you to record the inputs as:
Input 1/2 as L/R in a single stereo source
Input 1 as a mono source
Input 2 as a mono source
It is very cool that they are still supporting this with driver updates.
I installed the driver and still can't get my input audio to work, do you have an idea why?
2:00 since you pointed out the Kensington lock: I love how that lock is right next to one of the three Phillips head screws you need to remove to detach the backplate and the Kensington lock from the rest of the device. 😂
Great job, Julian. If people want to know what this interface sounds like with singing, here is an exaple of a song that I did with the Behringer UMC202HD. The mic was a GLS Audio ES57. This song was mastered by computer. This sounds very different that with the SM7b It shows the capabiility of this little Behringer interface. ua-cam.com/video/tUMieGC32-0/v-deo.html
Clear & Precise Tutorials, love it! You have a new subscriber mate! Thanks, keep em coming!
I’m ordering one shortly! I’m very excited.
Hey, thanks for this! Nothing wasted, and everything to the point. My AI said that there's zero latency problem with direct monitoring, so if I bend a note then I hear it in real time thru the interface, so...there's that. It's a good thing.
Thank you for this very informative talk, now I know what I will buy.
Good information provided here. I'm starting up a small recording studio and this will be perfect to get started. Thanks 👍
Great Review!!! Now you really convinced me to buy one:). Thank You!
Just bought this from Amazon today! Cant wait to see how this thing works for recording vocals and guitar tracks! Thanks again🍻
@@edwinsm2009OriginalSongs so, how was your purchase,are you satisfied by the unit?
Thanks for another great video Julian.
A couple of confirmations...
If your are just recording a single mic you will only hear direct on one side?
There is no way to adjust the input/mix level ratio for direct monitoring?
thank you so much for confirming my thoughts on purchasing this interface for my windows 7 laptop!
How have you experienced with this audio interface?
Memercorey I never bought this for whatever reason...
Great overview sir. Subscribed because of this and other great assessments I’ve watched today.
Thanks for your Comprehensive Review. It helped me decide. Cheers
Bought a lot of Behringer audio gear over the years. Quality at a decent price--Behringer's the best.
Thank you for a detailed review. Can you please make review a video on UMC204HD Vs UMC202HD? Also, please make comparison videos with top 7 or top 10 audio interfaces below $200?
I had the 204hd for a week, loads of outputs and great quality. But I felt the DAC performance lagged behind the Mackie Onyx I had before that, so I sent it back and bought a Mackie onyx producer, definitely a clearer DAC performance. However the value for money is awesome ...
Great review.Im about to buy this now
wow, what a review, thanks for this!
Great review Julian, convinced me to buy one for my SM57.
Nice, enjoy your interface!
Thanks for the info. I ordered this today. I have Windows 10 Pro. I'm guessing from the vid I may have to install the drivers twice? Also, do the drivers come with the interface?
Awesome review! Ordering this today :)
hi julian, nice review.
i expect to buy this or the UMC204HD.
what headphones impedance you advice to buy???
thanks!!!
Thank you so much, perfect video ! All the infos you need are in there
just bought one thanks to you julian...ill test it when i get a decent mic...at2035 or stellar x2
excellent and thorough review, thank you
Ausgezeichnet! Danke und Respekt!
@Julian Krause, thanks a lot for the great in-depth reviews you do! One quick question: I currently have a Line6 POD Studio UX2 and I'm thinking about going for this Behringer UMC202HD. Do you think that's an upgrade or should I keep my Line6 POD Studio UX2 instead? Thanks a lot in advance! Cheers!
Great video! I hope you can make video review on the Native Instruments Komplete Audio 1 & 2 next time. Thanks!
Very detailed and useful review! Thank you!
This is a great review of the item! I was looking for assistance for a friend looking to upgrade to it and you addresssed the problems I had with my own Behringer. Great job :)
Great review! On the Behringer UHD404HD video, you talk about poor THD performance when approaching the max signal level. In your testing did you discover whether the UMC202HD suffers from the same issue? Thank you.
Great video! Would u prefer the Behringer UMC 202HD or the Presonus Studio 24c?
This just blew my mind a little bit.
I mean, obviously this interface is in not exactly what anyone would claim to be "ideal" in most scenarios, but
where it dose "shine"?
Is kind of where it counts.
Especially for someone w/ a limited budget, or a kid chasing their dreams and aspirations.
Definitely punches well above it's price point, and genuinely higher than I would of assumed prior to watching this.
I'm actually kind of impressed TBH.
I love your content BTW Julian.
I regularly find myself here at the end of any random interface wormhole. Ha!
Good stuff.
Excellent review!
Superb review,
vielen Dank!
Gern geschehen!
Excellent video. Wish you would of done a teardown to show the internals so we could see what AD/DA converters are used and the overall build quality.
An in-depth and Excellent review! Thankyou so much for your efforts!
This will be my first audio interface ever (gonna order it soon) so i have a question.
Do i strictly need Monitor speakers for sound output? Or will normal speakers connected to the speaker out (green out) of MoBo work?
PS. I do have Audio technica monior headphones for direct monitoring.
Hey, glad you liked my review! You do not strictly need monitor speakers. If you already got some speakers hooked up to your PC they will still work fine. But if you want to connect speakers to the interface they have to be active speakers with a buit in amplifier.
Julian, I started in electronics in 1976, but since 1981 made my living in IT. Now I have a little A/V studio for fun, with mixer, a few Behringer UMC.. interfaces etc. On my UMC404 and 202 I noticed that while it has low self noise the mic inputs are shit. I gave you my background to say that I now how to isolate problems. Specifically using condenser mics, the high pitch static on these devices is horrible if the wire is touched. Using everything the same except the UMC404 or 202 with other interfaces when the mic wire is touched it's heard but not with that horrible high pitch static. I assume it's the price point of these boxes somewhere before it gets to the preamp itself? I know it's happening, and tested on multiple units, but wanted your thoughts. I see nothing on this anywhere.
Saludos, la UMC204HD o la Minifuse 2?...
Excellent video - thank you. This video alone made me a subscriber.
Hi there and thanks for this in-depth honest review video.
I stupidly bought a condenser mic kit that already has external phantom power with it (Neewer NW-800). Total newbie looking to start a podcast.
Would you honestly recommend that I fork out another 25 € for the 202HD - is there notable difference that I could later use with a more professional mic?
Pls let me know, I'd hate to buy yet another wrong piece of gear :-(
Cheers buddy!
I laughed when he said "most importantly the kensignton lock" hahaha -- Great review
Hey Julian would this interface be good for the Sennheiser hd560S. They are 120ohm.
Excellent detailed Review 👍👍
Sehr gut gemacht! Thumbs up.
There is one thing about noise measurements, which I don't get. Nevermind the EIN, i am talking actual noise readings here. I've tested the Behringer UMC202HD HD and the Steinberg UR22 Mk II, which to my experience have pretty much the same gain. And i tested them with and without the Titanaudio Fethead. I used my RØDE Procaster microphone to set the gain for a signal of -20dBFS at normal talking Volume. After that, i unplugged the microphone and went for the DMX Terminator Plug (110 Ohms) solution to have a somewhat comparable noise reading. On the Steinberg UR22 MK II, the outcome was, what I did expect. -79 ~ -74dBFS with no Fethead and the Gain set to ~91%. And -85/-83dBFS with the Fethead and the Gain set to ~28%. So yea, the Fethead reduced the noise i had quite drastically. And while the Behringer UMC202HD did give me what i expected, with no difference between the reading with and the one without the fethead, the outcome was still weird. Why was the UMC202HD, with a reading of -79/-76dBFS on both tests noisier, than the reading from the UR22 Mk II with the fethead?
And knowing the infamous quietnes of the SM7B, i went on and did the same tests with 100% full Gain without the Fethead and ~40% Gain with the Fethead. And i didnt even went on and did the comparison with the UR22 Mk II, because of this: Without the Fethead at 100%, i got a reading of -70/-65dBFS. I remember you saying, that there is no need for a Fethead on the UMC202HD. But the reading I got with the Fethead and the Gain set even to 50% seems to prove you wrong, because I get a reading of -77/-72dBFS. With 7dBFS of difference in the intensity of the noise, how can there be no need for a Fethead or a similar device here?
Thanks for the in-depth n clear review, how would you rate the Beringer C1 mic n the hps 5000 headphones that come with the complete kit?
Very helpful, which microphone do you recommend for home recording?
Very good review... But, does it have ASIO driver? For VST instruments. Thank you
Thank you, Julian, for a very informative, easy to understand and technically accurate explanation of the Behringer interface. I have just purchased the UMC204HD, and overall it is a very nice interface. However, the noise seems to be very high. When I have nothing plugged into the inputs I get noise levels of about -90 dBFS with the gain knobs turned to their minimum, and about -56 dBFS with the gain knobs turned to their maximum. (I'm measuring the noise level with the vMix live streaming software.) The hiss is also quite audible in the headphones, especially when the gain knob is set to about 60% or more.
Comparing these figures with what you report, the noise is very high. Is there perhaps some setting that I need to adjust, or is it possible that there is something wrong with this particular device, or is this just normal for the Behringer UMC204HD? (One of the reasons I bought it was for the low noise levels!)
I would appreciate greatly if you have a minute or two to reply.
First of all, great review! It was quite professional and you were very clear and concise.
I actually just got this audio interface today and it seems pretty good. My only problems with it so far as that it seems like I need a lot of gain (at least 65-70%) in order to get good recordings for both my guitar and voice. I am using a dynamic microphone (Samson Q2U), so that might explain why it needs more gain. I'm using direct input for the guitar of course, and it still needs quite a lot of gain. Also, when using this audio interface for listening to things through my headphones, there is a slightly high hissing sound that is barely present when the headphone levels are below 50% and when they are roughly 60 percent.
Other than that, this seems like a good audio interface, but I really hate having to use at least 65% gain in order to get good audio with my mic. I'm not sure if this is normal or if I'm doing something wrong, so any help would be greatly appreciated.
@@JulianKrause Yeah, good point. I'll do some more tests with the gain set a bit higher and see what happens. Besides, I can always use the pad, if need be. Thanks, for the great review.
Yeah dynamic mics usually need more gain because they usually never clip(theyre great for drums and loud sounds near the sound source
Julian what is your professional work title? You are the 'King of Specs!" You;ve even taught me some things cheers mate or Danke Schon as you lot say!
ok im gonna buy this, i sold the um2 cause i need to xlr inputs so this seems quite good.. i dont need fancy leds in the front panel, i need a decent preamp and enough gain for a dynamic mic
Can you please do a test of the Roundtrip Latency for this model? all your other reviews have roundtrip latency tests but this one does not, why?
Brilliant! Thank you.
This interface doesn't have reconstruction filters after DAC's. At least on the rear outputs. The output signal is a high ultrasonic frequency MESS! If you planning to connect PA system with wide frequency response, you can burn your tweeter speakers at high volume! Other than that... as a recording interface is pretty good for the price point.
from my hearing tweeters are usually too high on the high ends
Hey Julian, Great channel! Really like what you're doing!
I have a Beyerdynamic MC840 mic with a dbx 286 S pre-amp. I use the Behringer as for A/D conversion (through the line-input). The low EIN (which you faithfully speak of and show in all your vids) i.c.w. the low price convinced me to buy this over the Focusrite..... or any other A/D converter.
I know that normally with a mic like the Beyer you would a different, more expensive setup, but for voice-over work this ROCKS for me :-)
Keep up the good work neighbour :-)
S.
We have the four-channel version of this and it is a steal, for the price.
Great video review, top quality information, and not JUST lifted hopefully off the spec sheet! (In automobile circles they talk of 'power at the glove box', i.e. quoted horsepower in the handbook!) Thank you for going to such lengths to help your audience - you certainly know your stuff :-) Do you have any experience with using this type of product with Linux platforms, notably (I guess) drivers?
Thanks very much for the video. It's super informative. I was just wondering if you can choose which inputs gets phantom power, for example, if I wanted to plug in a condenser and a dynamic mic at the same time.
No, that's not possible. You can only switch the phantom power for both inputs simultaneously. That's usually not a problem though, because dynamic mics don't care if the phantom power is turnd on or not. So, if you use can use a condenser and dynamic mic simultaneously.
I have been happy with my UMC202HD, but as I am an audio novice, I did encounter lots of problems with clicks and pops early-on. I believe I was just at that level of output where the Behringer will overdrive and pop, even though the levels looked good on the computer. Now that I have lowered the levels a bit, and use computer software to set my levels where I need them (I use Voicemeeter Banana into OBS), I have a much better audio quality than I originally did. Not sure if my choice is the best, but I'm running 24-bit/48 and buffer is at 1024. I have no idea if this is correct, but it works, with a very slight latency adjustment to my audio/video in OBS.
I bought one, used. Almost 1 year using it now. Never have problem apart from headphones pot start to make noise on some position, but it get cleared after playing the position. I guess the pots are the weakest point on this interface, better not to leave it on same position for a long time. Not using it for any serious production, but the output itself is already a big upgrade from output on motherboard. Behringer driver seems really well built, although it's very simple in terms of features.
Awesome review as always. I have learned a lot about audio interface thanks to all of your videos. I would like to ask you a question. Which one would you recommend : Behringer UMC202HD, Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 and Steinberg UR22C. I hope you are going to recommend the Behringer model because I did notice it have the lowest noise floor. It's also the most affordable in my country. Thanks
Scarlett is the way to go, This is what the pros use. Steinberg Im not sure
Well done review, thank you.
Great review and some great quality video 👍🏻👍🏻
Thanks!!!
thank you, this review helps me a lot
1. Would this audio interface be a good choice for podcasting ? or recording of audio in general ?
2. Why do so many seem to swear by the Focusrite 2i2 ? is there any difference in build or sound quality ?
thanks a bunch :D
I think the 2i4 is the better choice for podcasting because you can properly monitor the audio. Not only on one side of the headphones. The 2i2 has better headphone output quality. The recording quality is very similar.
@@JulianKrause please explain how,the headphone output quality differs, I thought it was frequency and resistance that made the headphone quality.Im not to familiar with the output quality, or is the behringer limited to 48khz headphone output, the distortion you discussed in an earlier reply or is there something else?
The kingsington hole is there to save a.tiny bit of material
hi Julian. In your opinion for audio and sound quality and for converters the focusrite 2i2 or the Behringer umc204hd is better?
Hey Julian. I'm looking to start my home studio and I just watched your M-Audio 192|4 Review. Just a quick question. Which one do you prefer for a beginner studio like mine? This one the Behringer UMC202 or the M-Audio 192?
Weird question but is the headphone jack able to push a 250 ohm headphone?
I would prefer 80 ohms dt770pro with a sonarworks reference 4 profile .. Thats my studio gear.
Your videos are great!
You are an expert
Hi, I'm about to buy this interface, but I need to know wheter the TRS inputs, when used as line, are mono or stereo. For example, will I have to plug each channel of my tape deck in a different input, or a stereo Jack plugged in just one input would work? Thanks
Hey, the TRS inputs are balanced mono inputs. You have two channels on this interface and if you want to record a stereo signal, the left and right signal would need go into a seperate input. I imagine your tape deck has RCA outputs. In this case you would need to use a cable like this: www.thomann.de/de/cordial_cfu_15_pc.htm?sid=c123dce9a4bd1c88bc650a3840270469
What is the difference between the UMC202HD and the UMC204HD? Do they use the same electronics?
Nice review video man! Would you recommend this over the scarlett solo? They are priced the same in my country so I was wondering which would be a better buy.
Yeah, that's a hard choice between the 202HD and the solo. If you really only need one input the solo seems to be a good choice. But for the same price you get two inputs on the 202HD. So, if you know that you need two inputs at some point, the 202HD is the better choice. But it has one big downside: When you use direct monitoring on the UMC202HD you will only hear channel 1 on the left and channel 2 on the right in your headphones. This might be a dealbreaker for you.
@@JulianKrause Thank you for the reply. I guess I'll go for the solo then, I believe it has two inputs one for an xlr and one for guitar...but if I go higher is it worth it to get the 204hd or the 2i2? I'm planning to record music with guitar and vocals.
@@giovcarrillo4222 Depends on whether you need the two inputs. I would say: If you only need one mic input and a guitar input the solo is a good choice. If you need more inputs but you can't spend more, then go with the UMC202HD. If you need two inputs and you have a little bit more mone, the UMC204HD is very good, because it doesn't have the monitoring problem as the UMC202HD. I would only recommend the 2i2 if you have the money and like the little higher build quality.
@@JulianKrause Thanks for the advice man. You have very good review and tutorial videos, very professional. I hope your channel will grow fast.
@@giovcarrillo4222 Thanks!
I have a high pitched whine (around 10kHz) coming out of my UMC202HD phones output 🙁 Tested on multiple computers. It disappeares when the knob is in a sweetspot which is at around 60%, so I keep it around that value.
Same thing
Great video. How does this compare to the focusrite 2i2? For what I can see the umc202hd looks better
Hey, if you want you can have a look at the review I did about the 2i2 here: ua-cam.com/video/FdH5cnjmfUc/v-deo.html
In short, the 2i2 and the UMC202HD are pretty close in terms of audio performance.
Hi Julian would you say this is as good, worse or better for recording vinyl at 24bit 192k than the SSL2+
So I can buy a sm7b for this without fethead???