• 7 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
List of Audio Interfaces
The Steinberg UR22mkii works on my iMac (2019) under OS Catalina and on its Windows 10 partition with Jamkazam 2.0 experimental frame rate as follows:
iMac, core audio 9.4 ms Windows ASIO 6.6 ms

Both setups work fine in actual ensemble sessions.

Cyril Penn
  Reply
In the spreadsheet I couldn't see any details about the Focusrite 2i2 working with MacOS. I'm sure lots of people are using this successfully but, for completeness, here is my experience:

I have now done a few Jamkazam sessions using a Scarlett 2i2 3rd Gen with MacOS Catalina on a MacBook Air (2020). I have been using a frame size of 1ms and sample rate of 48k. It uses the Mac Core Audio driver but I have installed the Focusrite Low Latency Installer which tweaks some of the driver internals. This has been a stable setup for several sessions of a couple of hours each and gives an interface latency of 4.6ms.
  Reply
Hi Kevin,

that is a great list and valuable resource to all Jamkazammers, thank You!

I was running on a Scarlett 2i2 1st gen until lately, some update (I suppose Win, Focusrite but unlikely JKZ) made it have tooHAH much latency.

So I went searching, and as I could do with a replacement for my old console, I checked the small analogue Mixers.
My advice:
- go for a latest version of any device. A friend had a A&H ZED 10 or so channel, but the design is >6yrs old.
- always check the driver description on the download page. Some vendors specify the min. latency (i.e. min. number of frames buffered)

The small YAMAHAs (Y MG10XU et al.) were out of the game as I tested them with poor sound/channel strips.
It was finally a MACKIE that got it all right. M. specifies a minimum of 8 frames for buffering. So if your Laptop is not too historic, that results in great latency numbers.
To clear up a myth, I always recommend to go for latest version of hardware, e.g. USB 3.0 i.s.o. 2.0. That one is not governing latency, I found! It is, in fact, the USB controller plus the design of the driver that obviously make a difference.

The MACKIE ProFX--v3 Series "only" has a USB 2.0, but they must have integrated a very fast controller, plus the driver is excellent.

I am surprised about the data, I own the ProFX12v3:
- Roundtrip latency is 3.2ms
- JKz buffer can be set as low as 1ms (in manage>audio>audio booster)
- it samples 24Bit @192kHz
- USB 2.0
- the console has 4 in, 2 out, so I can use any channel (Youtube, MP3...) from my laptop as playback


My PC:
- Win 8.1
- Core i5, 4th generation (i5-4200, 2.97GHz) so pretty dated
- 8GB RAM
- USB 2.0 or 3.0

I'd be grateful if you could update your list!

Best regards,
MrFourstrings
  Reply
Hi, I have 2 older audio interfaces to report on: Edirol UA700 and Echo Audio Audiofire 2

Edirol UA-700 (discontinued Roland product; a "Swiss Army Knife" of early USB audio interfaces), works fine with a Mac: with current JamKazam build, Mac OS 10.12 on a 2008 Macbook Pro, Core Driver, latency ~8ms (in JamK, go to Manage/Audio/Audio Booster and take frame size down to 2 ms). This interface does not work anymore with Windows systems (drivers not updated by Roland).

   

Echo Audio, Audiofire 2, older firewire interface, works fine with JamKazam current build, on Mac or Windows 10, though lowest latency is about 11ms. Echo Audio, a great company, continued to update their Audio Console software, too, which gives you control of this device.

   

- Lou in So Cal
  Reply
Zoom R8 = Compatible


Just a shoutout.   

Zoom R8 works on Mac (High Sierra)
with 10.4Ms latency @ 2.5ms frame size..
I've set it up with 2ms frames so iatency<10 and it works well.
Channel 1 = Instrument
Channel 2 = Mic
  Reply
I've been using a MOTU UltraLite-MK3 Hybrid USB/FireWire Audio Interface since March and with the help and advice of other JK users, I've tweeked it down to 6.8ms of interface latency and less than 10ms overall. I'm using two mic channels and one stereo input with no effects in the JK chain. Friends and I have been recording original music on JK since June and it has been incredibly productive. I'm on an older Mac Pro desktop machine running OS 10.11 (El Capitan). I've also used the MOTU on my Dell Latitude E6440 running Win10 with slightly better results. However, the Mac is my "music computer" and it is in the office where all of my music instruments live. ;-)
  Reply
Getting good connection with old audio interface and new Mac
Focusrite Saffire Pro 24 DPS
Mac mini running Catalina 32 GB 2667 MHz DDR4 3.2 GHz 6-Core Intel Core i7
  Reply
(04-05-2020, 03:27 AM)kkriner@gmail.com Wrote: Hi, all! I've gone through all the forum posts so far and compiled a list of audio interfaces for our use.

i've been using Audient EVO4 with imac for many months.  never any problems.
  Reply
I have used a Creative Labs Sound blaster Audigy5/rx somewhat successfully. This is an internal sound card.

Pros:
Latency and stability are very good. Sound quality if fine.

Con:
Although it has 3 inputs (mic/mic/line) I can only get the line input to work well. It took a while to fid the right input (there are several options). Therefore, I have to route everything through my mixer which is a pain.

I am going to change to a "real" AI (likely Behringer UMC202HD) as soon as one becomes available. Trying to buy local....
  Reply
(10-12-2020, 04:33 PM)Tim Betteridge Wrote: I have used a Creative Labs Sound blaster Audigy5/rx somewhat successfully. This is an internal sound card.

Pros:
Latency and stability are very good. Sound quality if fine.

Con:
Although it has 3 inputs (mic/mic/line) I can only get the line input to work well. It took a while to fid the right input (there are several  options). Therefore, I have to route everything through my mixer which is a pain.

I am going to change to a "real" AI (likely Behringer UMC202HD) as soon as one becomes available. Trying to buy local....

Update: Found out that I didn't have a stereo splitter cable going in to the line input so now I have split the line input to left/right. I run the instrument through one channel and mic through the other. My latency numbers are extremely good (typically 3.4ms), and I have to say that this solution works very well. I've had no issues at all.

I would recommend this solution if you have a PC.
  Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)