Behringer and Focusrite

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
There are two newer USB audio inerfaces.
BEHRINGER U-PHORIA UMC202
and
Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 2 In/2 Out USB Recording Audio Interface

Which one would be better for using with ARTA and other similar software ?
I'm expecting someone to have tried them already.
Thanks.
 
I have the 2i2, but not the umc202. If you have any other questions or want any other measurements let me know.

wliOMCr.png


JebYm1Z.png
 
Last edited:
Thanks for those measurements Nyt.
I didn't check the thread for a while. Looks like no one with the UMC202HD has responded. I guess someone must be using it ?
It looks like the Focusrite is a shade more expensive than the Behringer.
The UMC202HD goes up to 192Khz. The Focusrite is 96K hz .
Strangely I don't see any specifications for the Behringer anywhere ! Like just a vague 'super mic preamp' designed by Midas. No numbers.

Hope someone with the UMC202HD will post their experience with this unit. Behringer claims it's 'built like a tank' ! :)
 
Thanks for those measurements Nyt.
I didn't check the thread for a while. Looks like no one with the UMC202HD has responded. I guess someone must be using it ?
It looks like the Focusrite is a shade more expensive than the Behringer.
The UMC202HD goes up to 192Khz. The Focusrite is 96K hz .
Strangely I don't see any specifications for the Behringer anywhere ! Like just a vague 'super mic preamp' designed by Midas. No numbers.

Hope someone with the UMC202HD will post their experience with this unit. Behringer claims it's 'built like a tank' ! :)

The 2i2 is on massdrop for $120 atm.

https://www.massdrop.com/buy/focusrite-2i2
 
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
It is actually the noise floor. But the RMS noise is of course not -145 dB. Probably more like -100 to -110 dB.

I have attached a couple of measurements I made some time ago. I used averaging to make the noise floor more smooth, so that it is possible to see if there are discrete noise components, like 50/60 Hz + harmonics or some noise from digital clocks etc.

Increasing the size of the FFT window size is also useful, as shown in the last figure in the attachment. It reveals some faint noise components at the upper end of the frequency range. But it does not change the RMS value of the noise floor. The noise floor is lower, but there are also more bins to add in the RMS calculation, so the end result of the RMS value is the same. In this case there is actually a 0.1 dB difference, but that is just a small random variation.
 

Attachments

  • Noise Measurements on an AK5394A design.pdf
    41.7 KB · Views: 164
UMC202 has more distortion than one would want for certain types of measurements - I think its from the "MIDAS" input section (these are loop measurements) - if I'm using RMAA properly (?) then here's what am seeing.

btw. dynamic range did not improve at 2496

64d5aLd.jpg


THD inputs at 5 o'clock
2PJzPjC.jpg


THD inputs at 1 o'clock - you can see things aren't properly settling and there was a warning of interchannel interference which I could not influence for the better
Q5HwAZ3.jpg


there seems to be a HF spike which is compromising things - is it an internal oscillaiton? - from my laptop?
ea9zdAx.jpg
 
Last edited:
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.