Jim Roseberry

The UMC Interfaces are excellent low-latency performers. During lock-down, lots of folks using them for virtual jams/rehearsals...

The Orion Studio Synergy Core was connected via Thunderbolt. FWIW, No audio interface can achieve round-trip latency that low via USB-2/3. USB-2/3 can achieve ~4ms (under ideal circumstances)

7950x early low-latency audio performance: In short, impressive. Studio One Pro v5.5.2 with Antelope Orion Studio Synergy Core Able to run Helix Native (substantial patch) at less than 1ms total round-trip latency (96k using a 24-sample ASIO buffer size) Able to run Tonex at ~0.5ms total round-trip latency (96k using a 16-sample ASIO buffer size) Completely glitch-free... (tested playing for hours)

TDP for the 7950x is 170w

One thing that's currently a bit of a drag is that you can only have a single Tonex "capture" loaded (standalone or in Amplitube 5.5). IOW, You can't have a capture of a tube-screamer... going into a capture of a JCM-800. The current workaround is to use multiple instances of Tonex or Amplitude. I certainly hope IK addresses this. I haven't yet tried the capture process. I'm a bit surprised to hear folks talking about 40-60 minutes for the training process to finish. I've done a fair bit of capturing via the Quad Cortex. It's training process takes a couple of minutes. Even that can be a bit tedious... especially if you're capturing multiple mics/positions. With an hour between "takes", you'll want to plan ahead (test recordings) to make sure you've got it right.

That's the only "solution"... Even then, low-latency performance (by comparison) is pretty lame. ?

The 7950x will run at 95 degrees C. Note that with proper cooling, it will not thermal-throttle under load. I'd consider quality 360mm water-cooler a minimum. It is a bit alarming compared to previous designs/thermals. 5950x also runs "hot"... but with proper cooling won't thermal-throttle. The 12900ks runs well with quality 280mm water-cooler. I'd expect the 13900ks/s to need a quality 360mm water-cooler (or better). With 16+ core "workstation" type CPUs, air-cooling (even the Noctua D15) just isn't up to the task. 10980xe with D15 with thermal-throttle under significant load. I've tested/verified. There are folks on YouTube who've built Threadripper based machines using the D15. Runs fine at idle and under light loads... Guaranteed to thermal-throttle under significant load (defeats the whole purpose) I've done many prototype Threadripper builds trying to get noise under control. With 280w TDP and active-cooled chipsets... forget it

12900ks (5.5GHz Max Turbo) TDP = 150w I'll get Max Turbo TDP for the 7950x (once it's fully built/optimized)

13900k Base Clock: Performance Cores = 3GHz Efficient Cores = 2.2GHz 13900k Max Turbo: Performance Cores = 5.8GHz Efficient Cores = 4.3GHz 7950x Base Clock = 4.5GHz (across all 16 cores) 7950x Max Turbo = 5.7GHz (this is the X-Factor) ie: If the 7950x can achieve Max Turbo across 8+ cores, that's going to be hard to beat.

I'm aware of the 13900k (been running both a 12900k and 12900ks for a good while). 13900k adds eight more efficient cores... and increases clock-speed to 5.8GHz for performance cores... and 4.3GHz for efficient cores. Both the 13900k and 7950x have 32 processing threads. On paper, one would expect the 13900k to leapfrog the 7950x (as 12900k leapfrogged the 5950x)... but it's speculation until we can run audio specific tests. I would have liked to see 8 additional performance cores... instead of 8 additional efficient cores. With the 7950x, AMD seems to have achieved significantly higher all-core clock-speed (vs the 5950x). That kind of leaves the door open to doubt... as the 7950x has 16 full-performance cores... with max turbo of 5.7GHz. The PC Mag article mention's price being ~$100 less than the 7950x. That's not likely... because the current 12900ks is $700 (same cost as the 7950x). Synthetic benchmarks show the 7950x besting the 12900ks in most scenarios. I'm most interested in the absolute limits of ultra low latency audio performance. In that regard, there's not a huge difference between the 5950x, 12900k, and 12900ks. Audio specifics to come...

AMD's Ryzen 7xxx series has been released. Base: 4.5Ghz Turbo: 5.7GHz 16 cores 32 processing threads TDP is listed at 170w Absolutely needs robust cooling (95 degrees C) You can get it to run quiet... but it's definitely more complex than something like a 12700k. Audio specific details to follow. Want to see numbers compared to M1 Max? ?

One night, we had a sound engineer "sound-checking" guitar for 45 minutes. Want to guess what instrument the sound engineer plays? ? Annoyed us... and certainly annoyed the patrons! Another night, we had a (last minute fill-in) "house" sound engineer who mixed the entire show while sitting at the bar (back to us the entire night). Clearly didn't want to be there... Talked with the venue owner (great guy)... and that particular fella won't be mixing any more of our shows. Yet another show, we had a young lady running sound... who spent more time texting her boyfriend than actually mixing the band. Local festival where we had to load-in five hours early... because they shut down roads Made for a long night We're easy to work with... and we like the same in the sound engineer. Someone competent... with decent gear... who's mixing (problem solving) the entire show At this point, there's a handful of local sound engineers that we'll use. If we can't get one of those folks, we won't book the gig. With three band members 50+, life's too short for carp sound. ?

The 12900k, 12900ks, and AMD's 5950x are all 16-core CPUs. It's much more difficult to get these running extremely quiet. It can certainly be done... but it takes a lot more effort than the 12700k.

To clarify, the 12700k does not run extremely hot. It's easily kept cool/quiet with a quality air-cooler. You could have a condenser mic just a couple of feet away... and not pickup any fan noise. If you're after performance (especially low latency performance), clock-speed is still the single most important factor.

Sounds like you know exactly what you're looking for... Klark Teknik makes the EQP-KT. I had a pair... and they sound pretty decent. I think the Warm EQP-WA sounds better. Side note: Klark Teknik 76-KT (1176 clone) sounds great. Makes everything sound huge/aggressive.

Pultec type EQ is a bit different. It's a really sweet sounding EQ (especially the top-end)... but it's more for subtle enhancement. I think the WA73 EQ (1073 clone) is pretty nice... and more "utilitarian" than Pultec type EQ. I'm taking it you don't care for the WA73's EQ?

If you have two WA73 channel-strips, you already have what you seek. ? IMO, The WA73 EQ is superior to those you're contemplating.

FWIW, My DAWs are all connected to the Internet... and most run 24/7. Never a problem... First, make sure you have proper backup. Next, make sure you're running Win10x64 Pro... so you can fully disable all automatic updates. Not a fan of any 3rd-party AV application on any high-performance machine...

We were playing a large private party last night. Great time, great setup, right near the pool and hot-tub Ladies dancing in bathing suits. One had a cover-up top where it looked like nothing was underneath. Distracting to say the least. Tried to avoid looking that direction. Hazards of playing gigs at 55. ?

In short, you could use something like ASIO4ALL to create an "aggregate" audio device. That said, I wouldn't bother. The two audio interfaces will be running on separate digital clocks... meaning audio between the two interfaces will drift apart over time (due to minute differences between the two digital clocks).

Fame in-and-of itself doesn't bring happiness. I'm sure it's the same for extreme wealth. I know with some of our "Industry" clients, they face the same day-to-day issues/challenges/stress. Just on a larger scale...

With the 5950x and 12900k/s (current gen 16+ core CPUs), heat is more of an issue. Temp increases under load are more dramatic... requiring more robust cooling. You can certainly build a quiet 5950x or 12900k/s based machine, it's just more complicated. If trying to keep the build a bit more simple, the 12700k is a great choice.

Sure... as great as advanced sample libraries can be, they're still a "snap-shot" of the real thing. Witness frowns/groans that often accompany playing Sax samples. ? Physical Modeling has the potential to sound more realistic (especially in dynamic changing/evolving facets). Both are bound by current techniques and available DSP resources. When Physical Modeling offers an experience close to 100% , (just like a real violin/sax/etc) it'll take many hours to learn to play it musically. That will truly be "VAST" synthesis.

Threadripper offers great multi-threaded performance, but has two achilles' heels. Poor ultra low latency performance (due to CPU architecture) Super high TDP of 280w (there is no quiet Threadripper build - unless you allow thermal-throttling) Ryzen 5xxx series is where AMD greatly improved low-latency performance. When the 5950x was released, it leap-frogged the 10900k in both single-core and multi-core performance. I tested the 5950x for a long while to get a configuration I was comfortable with for clients. With current AMD and Intel 16+ core CPUs, thermal fluctuations (under load) are more extreme than with the 10900k (10th gen i9). It takes more robust cooling... and (if you're wanting a near silent machine), it takes more radical settings in the BIOS. 5950x requires more radical BIOS settings than the 12900k. Otherwise, you'll hear constant ramping up/down of fans. The 11th Gen Intel i9 11900k was actually a couple steps backward (for DAW purposes). Low latency performance wasn't as good as the 10900k (due to CPU architecture changes) Overall performance wasn't as good as the 10900k The 11900k wasn't well received... for any high-performance application (gaming, video, audio, etc). With AMD clearly performance leader (both single-core and multi-core), Intel had to release something significant... and do it sooner than originally planned. Intel released the 12th gen 12900k. Totally new CPU architecture (8 "performance" and 8 "efficient" core, 24 processing threads, 5.2GHz max turbo frequency) The 12900k bests the 5950x in both single-core and multi-core performance. Intel's 12900k manufacturing yield has been good. Thus, the latest 12900ks was released (same CPU as the 12900k... but max turbo frequency is 5.5GHz). The 12900ks is currently the fastest CPU (for DAW purposes). If you're talking a "Gaming" machine, the single most important factor is clock-speed. If you're working a "hybrid" scenario (low latency audio and video editing), the 12900k/s and 5950x are both great options. If you're doing loads of video rendering (and can live with significant noise), Threadripper is a great choice. I tend to favor Intel CPUs (as long as performance is equal-to or greater-than AMD). It's more rare today than a decade ago, but you can bump into an odd scenario where a particular application/plugin isn't well optimized for AMD. ie: Celestion's Speaker Mix Pro was not well optimized for AMD CPUs. Performed significantly better on Intel CPUs (at ultra low latency). This isn't AMD's fault/responsibility, but it is something you may encounter.

Some of the figures from above are humorous... but way off base. I sent a 9+k machine out a few weeks back... and margin was not 2k. Turnabout is fair play. So, what do "Monkey" and "Carl" do for a living... and what do they get paid? Of course, it will be easy for me to say their services are not worth it... and both are overpaid. I could certainly do it myself for a lot less. Total waste of money. I think you're grossly over-paid... and I'll tell you what I think you should make. Sound ridiculous? It is...