On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 23:02 +0200, Sampo Savolainen wrote: > On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 14:49 -0600, Richard Smith wrote: > > Take a good look at the specs. I bought a M-Audio Audiophile USB and > > found out that it was not "class compliant" and then on top of that it > > was unable to do full-duplex audio at 24/96. I ended up buying a PCI > > card. > > Actually, you don't even have look at the specs. M-audio uses really > sneaky tactics with their USB devices. > > Look at the pictures of the Audiophile USB. See anything missing? Where > is the USB logo? They only use the "USB trident" which is used only to > identify the connector. They don't use the proper USB logo for which > they need to be class complient. If they would use the logo and fail > compliency, they would be subject to a flogging from USB-IF. > > So in effect, their USB devices aren't USB devices at all. They just > happen to work with some USB hosts. > > I got hit by this via their Quattro. Nice piece of kit, too bad it... > didn't work properly! >
Do some vendors actually make it difficult to find out whether the device is class compliant or not? Man, that would be evil. I've never used a USB audio device and don't plan to, but would expect this to be included in the specs posted on the web site... Also it's possible for a device to be USB compliant but not a "class compliant audio device". It used to be the easiest way to tell was "does it work on OSX without a driver", I'm not sure if that's still the case. Lee
