sure, i'll post some quotes:
"Generally, there is no difference in sound quality by design. Both
devices are made to sound as good and neutral as possible. You can
compare the tech specs, but whether or not or how much of a difference
in sound quality you will hear is something only your ears can tell you.
If you are the kind of person who will hear differences between
different digital cables, you may heare a good deal of a difference. Or
maybe you won't... I can't answer that, I'm afraid."
"The main objective of the FF400 is not to sound "better" than the FF800.
It was newly designed mostly because of new features (things like the
rotary encoder, the digitally controllable gain control of the mic
inputs etc. etc.). It is not just half the components of the FF800
squeezed into a 9.5" box...
The mic preamps have been slightly improved, whereas (mainly for lack of
space) combined ADDA chips are used (the same ones that are in the
Multiface II). You can read and compare the tech specs. But only you can
tell whether one of them will "sound" better to your ears. Essentially,
neither of the two is designed to have a characteristic sound of its
own."
motu ultralite vs rme ff400 converters,
sorry if this question has been asked.
does the ff400 drivers support the mac aggregate audio device option?
if I have an ff400, and a pci midi card (m-audio at this stage), can I aggregate them so I can essentially create a midi through device (midi in from one card, out from another)? I know from certain software I've tried this with before (namely kontakt), that the aggregate device option caused crashes.
cheers,
does the ff400 drivers support the mac aggregate audio device option?
if I have an ff400, and a pci midi card (m-audio at this stage), can I aggregate them so I can essentially create a midi through device (midi in from one card, out from another)? I know from certain software I've tried this with before (namely kontakt), that the aggregate device option caused crashes.
cheers,
