M In A Pickle, Saffire Or Fire Options

[Blue Sky]

hi, i am trying to make my mind up between the firebox by presonus and the saffire by foucsrite. i would like to hear ur oppinions. i want something that i could travel with but when i get home i can hook it up to monitors, a mixer and everything else there is in a home studio.

Ce message a été modifié par cstar1989 - dim. 18 sept. 2005, 11:06.

[rickenbacker]

Both are good interface and both do what you want. The Saffire has a higher possible sample rate (192 vs 96), but really 96 is high enough. FWIW, I preferred the FireBox and yes, I have had both on my desktop at the same time. Don't be swayed by the Focusrite software alone - it's not so amazing that you'll never use another compressor/EQ/reverb/amp sim ever again.

[Blue Sky]

Both are good interface and both do what you want. The Saffire has a higher possible sample rate (192 vs 96), but really 96 is high enough. FWIW, I preferred the FireBox and yes, I have had both on my desktop at the same time. Don't be swayed by the Focusrite software alone - it's not so amazing that you'll never use another compressor/EQ/reverb/amp sim ever again.

thank you very much for responding. i really want the firebox and i had my heart set on getting it too. then recently i found out about focusrite saffire and it looks amazing and it has a few more features, except it doesnt stack . whos idea was that!?! i wonder, how much bigger is it from the firebox? i really care about sound, unfortunately, nothing has really been said about saffire and i heard that firebox crackles and that really scares me b/c i want full blown crispy albums from my basement. oh, and just another thing, why do u perfer the firebox more?

Ce message a été modifié par cstar1989 - mar. 20 sept. 2005, 00:21.

[rickenbacker]

The FireBox's footprint is no bigger than a CD jewel case (lying flat). The Saffire is more like a Mac Mini standing on its edge. The shape is a real pain, actually, because while it might be thin it's still quite long/deep, so it still eats up a good amount of desk space. I can't believe they stuck with the Mbox shape, to be honest. Rackable/stackable gear is so much better. Also, the swivel foot Focusrite talk about as a feature is bobbins - it doesn't swivel like an office chair, which is what they imply. All you can do is lift it up, rotate the foot 90 degrees and then put it down again. So that's, er, two positions - parallel to you or pointing at you. Big effing deal! The Saffire might seem to have more to offer on paper, but in real-world terms the two units aren't that different. Plus you can only run four inputs to the Saffire - the FireBox offers six. Sound quality, the FireBox is excellent and the Saffire is good, too. There have been a few crackles with my FireBox, but nothing that has caused me permanent problems. I just preferred the simplicity of the FireBox and the fact that it does everything I need. 192KHz sample rates? Who can really tell much difference from 48 to 96, let alone double that?

[Blue Sky]

The FireBox's footprint is no bigger than a CD jewel case (lying flat). The Saffire is more like a Mac Mini standing on its edge. The shape is a real pain, actually, because while it might be thin it's still quite long/deep, so it still eats up a good amount of desk space. I can't believe they stuck with the Mbox shape, to be honest. Rackable/stackable gear is so much better. Also, the swivel foot Focusrite talk about as a feature is bobbins - it doesn't swivel like an office chair, which is what they imply. All you can do is lift it up, rotate the foot 90 degrees and then put it down again. So that's, er, two positions - parallel to you or pointing at you. Big effing deal! The Saffire might seem to have more to offer on paper, but in real-world terms the two units aren't that different. Plus you can only run four inputs to the Saffire - the FireBox offers six. Sound quality, the FireBox is excellent and the Saffire is good, too. There have been a few crackles with my FireBox, but nothing that has caused me permanent problems. I just preferred the simplicity of the FireBox and the fact that it does everything I need. 192KHz sample rates? Who can really tell much difference from 48 to 96, let alone double that?

thanks again! i think im going with the firebox for sure. i was talking to someone about it and he gave me good info too. plus iv been trying to make myself like saffire but i just cant get over that it looks like a kitchen appliance.

[klownshed]

I've had exactly the same decision to make: Firebox or Saffire (and I also considered an FA-66).

I've plumped for the saffire. The focusrite pres and DSP did it for me in the end. Ordered a saffire today... Hope it's good! ;-)

[rickenbacker]

I don't want to rain on anyone's parade, but the Saffire's DSP is an overrated aspect, IMHO. You can't use EQ and Amp Modelling at the same time - it's one or the other. You can't record the Reverb using the onboard DSP - it's for monitoring use only. You can't use the onboard DSP effects to treat signals coming through the digital S/PDIF. You've only got two analogue inputs. And if you've got a sequencer like Logic, you've already got some very nice plug-ins. Plus the software interface is horrible - I can't believe they designed it like that. Pale text on a pale background? Genius. The mic pres in both products are OK - calling them "Focusrite pres" doesn't make them sound any better. FWIW, neither product has better mic pres than the FMR Really Nice Preamp. Now THEY are very, very nice.

[klownshed]

What the DSP can be used for is to utilise the saffire as two channel strips with mic pre + compressor + EQ. It's replaced my rack mounted channel strip, EQ and compressor and saved me a ton of space. It's then easy to use other dynamic plug-ins once you've got everything recorded, and it's really nice to be able to monitor the signal with dynamics applied but record it unaffected. The dynamics plugs are then available as AU's if you want the same sound or you can use your other plugs to do the job.

Regardless of the DSP, it's a really nice interface. Once you've set up the saffire control software you don't actually need to have it running for the saffire to work.

On the negative side, I agree the softwares UI with its (almost) white on white legending isn't great and the amp modelling is pretty dreadful, unless you like your amps to sound fizzier than a dropped crate of pepsi.

I'd also trade a couple of outs for a couple more analogue INs, but on the whole it's obviously the best interface I could find within my budget (or I'd have bought a different one!).

The best thing about it (so far, haven't had it long) is that it's been 100% trouble free in operation. No crackles, pops or dropouts and it sounds good. I'm Happy.

[rickenbacker]

Cool. There will be many other happy Saffire users around the world in the coming months, as it's a decent interface for a fair price. I've just been standing on the periphery, stroking my chin and pondering its pros and cons for a while. I've come to the conclusion that a lot of what is pumped up on the Saffire box belies certain limitations in real-world use, which seems a little sneaky to me. Like you can't do that clever dry-signal recording business if you have anything connected to the S/PDIF inputs. I agree that saving space is good - full size rack units belong in recording studios, not home/project set ups. I'm rocking a cute pile of 1/3-rack devices these days, which is another reason why the Saffire disappointed me - that whole standalone thing. Each to his own, though. And it's streets ahead of the Mbox 2, so kudos to Focusrite for giving Digidesgn a good kick in the fanny!

[Blue Sky]

heres one thing i dont understand. i counted all of the inputs in each box and i see the same amount. how does firebox have more inputs??